Photodynamic therapy in the treatment of oral lichen planus with
            moderate‐to‐severe
            dysplasia: A case report

Background: Histopathological examination remains the gold standard for the diagnosis of oral mucosal lesions. To date little is known on the clinical–pathologic agreement for oral lesions diagnosed by oral medicine experts. Objective: This retrospective study attempts to quantify the clinical–pathologic agreement for oral lesions diagnosed by oral medicine experts. Methods: Data were collected retrospectively from the medical records of all new oral medicine consultations. The clinical diagnosis provided by an oral medicine expert was compared to the histopathological diagnosis. Clinical–pathologic agreement was estimated as the percentage agreement and was measured using weighted Kappa. Results: The most common oral lesions were oral lichen planus (34.7%), traumatic fibroma (23.4%), squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) or severe dysplasia (6.7%), mucous membrane pemphigoid (MMP) (5.7%), leukoplakia (5.6%) and squamous papilloma (4.3%). The overall clinical–pathologic agreement for all lesions had a weighted kappa of 0.81 [95%CI 0.78% to 0.85%]. The concordance for the most common oral lesions in the study population was 90.2%, with a weighted kappa of 0.88 [95%CI 0.85% to 0.92%]. The clinical–pathologic agreement for SCC/severe dysplasia was 78.7%, for traumatic fibroma 91.4%, for leukoplakia 97.4%, for oral lichen planus 93.8%, for squamous papilloma 96.7% and for MMP 65%. Conclusions: The overall concordance between clinical and histopathological diagnosis for oral lesions was excellent. Dentists have the unique opportunity to refer patients to oral medicine experts for diagnosis and management of oral diseases. Given their expertise patients may require fewer visits for diagnostic purposes.

Download Full-text

Efficacy evaluation of photodynamic therapy for oral lichen planus: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BMC Oral Health ◽

10.1186/s12903-020-01260-x ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 20 (1) ◽

Author(s):

Yuqing He ◽

Jiaxin Deng ◽

Yi Zhao ◽

Huiqian Tao ◽

Hongxia Dan ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Methylene Blue ◽

Photodynamic Therapy ◽

Diode Laser ◽

Lichen Planus ◽

Oral Lichen Planus ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Lesion Size ◽

Cochrane Library ◽

Oral Lichen

Abstract Background Photodynamic therapy (PDT) is a new option for oral lichen planus (OLP) management; however, there are different opinions on the efficacy of PDT for OLP. The aim of this study was to comprehensively assess the efficacy of PDT in the treatment of OLP and compare PDT with steroid therapy. Methods A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted to assess the curative effect of PDT. Five electronic databases were searched, PubMed, Web of Science, the Cochrane Library, Embase, and EBSCO up to 1 December, 2019. Random and fixed effects models for pooled estimates calculation were used and the Meta package of R was applied. Results Pooled estimates revealed that, after PDT, the lesion size decreased by 1.53 cm2 (95% confidence interval (CI): 0.71–2.35) after PDT and the partial response (PR) was 0.77 (95% CI: 0.65–0.85). The visual analogue scale (VAS) score decreased by 3.82 (95% CI: 2.80–4.85) and the Thongprasom sign score decreased by 1.33 (95% CI: 0.56–2.10) after PDT. Subgroup analyses revealed that the 5-aminolevulinic acid (5-ALA) was more effective than methylene blue (MB), with a PR of 0.87 (95% CI: 0.80–0.91). The topical use of 5-ALA yielded a better response than gargling methylene blue. In terms of VAS, the diode laser showed a better clinical PR in the treatment of OLP. In terms of changes in lesion size, the efficacy of the semiconductor laser was higher than that of the diode laser. PDT had a similar efficacy to topical corticosteroids, as shown by pooled estimates of five randomised controlled trials with 139 lesions. Conclusion This systematic review indicates that PDT is an effective treatment modality for the management of OLP. PDT is as effective as topical corticosteroid in the treatment of OLP and could be used for cases resistant to steroids or when steroids are contraindicated.

Download Full-text