RESUMO
Background: To evaluate the influence of chemotherapy on the prevalence of trismus in irradiated head and neck cancer patients. Material and Methods: This systematic review guided by PRISMA-2020 and registered in PROSPERO (CRD42021255377) screened 963 articles in 7 scientific-databases (PubMed, Lilacs, Livivo, Scopus, Embase, Web of Science, EBSCO) and 3 grey-literature databases (Open Grey, Google Scholar, ProQuest) and eight articles were included for qualitative synthesis, meta-analysis (combined odds ratio, inverse variance method plus random effects), heterogeneity analysis (I² and Tau²), one-of-out evaluation and publication bias analysis (Eggs' and Begg's tests) (RevMan®, p<0.05). The Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale Cohort Studies was used to assess the risk of bias (RoB). The classification assessment, development, and recommendations (GRADE) approach was used to assess the certainty of evidence. Results: The eight articles evaluated 1474 patients treated with chemoradiotherapy and 858 patients treated with radiotherapy. Five articles had low RoB, and three had high RoB. Chemoradiotherapy significantly (p=0.0003) increased the prevalence of trismus (OR=2.55, 95% CI = 1.53-4.23) compared to radiotherapy, with significant (p=0.010) but low heterogeneity (I²=59%;Tau²=0.29). There was no significant risk of publication bias, one-out analysis showed no significant difference between studies, and GRADE showed a moderate level of evidence. Trismus was directly associated to worse quality of life. Conclusions: The incidence of trismus increases when chemotherapy is combined with radiotherapy for head and neck cancer, which negatively impacts the quality of life. Key words:Radiotherapy, Chemoradiotherapy, Head and Neck Neoplasms, Trismus, Quality of Life.
RESUMO
OBJECTIVE: The objective of this systematic review was to determine whether oral and dental hygiene protocols (DHPs) reduce the incidence and severity of oral mucositis (OM) during antineoplastic treatment. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This PROSPERO-registered systematic review (CRD42021295322) was based on searches of publicly accessible databases, including PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, LILACS, EBSCOhost, LIVIVO, Embase, and gray literature (Google Scholar, ProQuest, and Energy) until December 2021. Twenty-five articles from these searches and 14 articles retrieved from the references therein were evaluated in this systematic review and meta-analysis. The risk of bias (RoB) was assessed using RoB-2 and ROBINS-I for randomized (RCT) and non-randomized (n-RCT) clinical trials, respectively. A meta-analysis was performed on RCTs and n-RCTs in two subgroups to evaluate oral mouth rinses or DHP. GRADE-pro was used to assess the degree of certainty of the evidence. RESULTS: Of the 3367 articles retrieved, 25 RCTs and 14 n-RCTs involving 2109 and 754 patients, respectively, were included in the analyses. RoB was low for RCTs and moderate-to-very severe for n-RCTs. High heterogeneity and publication RoB were identified. In RCTs, mouth rinses (p = 0.830) and DHP (p = 0.100) did not reduce the incidence of OM. However, mouth rinses strongly reduced the severity of OM (p < 0.001; Cohen's d = - 1.87, 95% confidence interval [CI] = - 2.49 to - 1.24). In non-RCTs, mouth rinses (p < 0.001) and DHP (p < 0.001) reduced the relative risk of OM 0.38 (95% CI = 0.24 to 0.59) and 0.64 (95% CI = 0.53 to 0.70) times, respectively. In addition, DHP strongly reduced OM severity (Cohen's d = - 0.81, 95% CI = - 1.03 to - 0.59). GRADE-pro showed high certainty of OM severity and incidence in RCTs and non-RCTs, respectively, and low (OM incidence in RCTs) to very low (OM severity in non-RCTs) certainty in other outcomes. CONCLUSION: DHPs strongly reduce the severity and moderately reduce the incidence of OM. However, further studies with low heterogeneity are needed to validate these findings.
