Study on Chemotherapy Agents in Saliva through Spectrometry and Chromatography Methods Correlated with Periodontal Status in Oncology Patients

2021 ◽  
pp. 95-107
Author(s):  
Diana Cristala Kappenberg Nitescu ◽  
Liliana Pasarin ◽  
Silvia Martu ◽  
Cornelia Teodorescu ◽  
Bogdan Vasiliu ◽  
...  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (13) ◽  
pp. 5984
Author(s):  
Diana Cristala Kappenberg Niţescu ◽  
Liliana Păsărin ◽  
Silvia Mârţu ◽  
Cornelia Teodorescu ◽  
Bogdan Vasiliu ◽  
...  

Background: The aim of this study is to quantify chemotherapy agents in the saliva of oncology patients undergoing intravenous chemotherapy treatment, and evaluate the oral and periodontal clinical modifications and possible correlations between them. Materials and Methods: The study was conducted on 29 patients undergoing chemotherapy treatment with cisplatin, oxaliplatin or gemcitabine. Three total saliva samples were gathered from each patient in three key points regarding chemotherapy. The samples were then analyzed through methods of mass spectrometry and liquid chromatography. Results: Cisplatin and gemcitabine were only found in saliva at 30 min and 2 h after chemotherapy administration, however oxaliplatin was determined in all three samples. Clinically, the most accentuated clinical attachment loss and CPITN scores were observed on mandibular teeth, whereas the highest values for the Sillness and Loe gingival index and gingival bleeding index were in the lateral maxillary areas. We found no statistically significant correlation between the periodontal parameters and chemotherapy concentration in saliva. Conclusion: A fraction of systemically administered chemotherapy can also be found in the saliva of oncology patients and have the potential to exacerbate oral infections and cause local and systemic complications throughout the oncology treatment. Further research is required in order to fully understand how chemotherapy can influence the development of periodontal disease.


2006 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kristina K. Hardy ◽  
Melanie J. Bonner ◽  
Katherine C. Hutchinson ◽  
Victoria W. Willard

2007 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stephen R. Lassen ◽  
Brent Collett ◽  
Stan Whitsett ◽  
Debra Friedman

2016 ◽  
Vol 07 (01) ◽  
pp. 20-25
Author(s):  
I. Pabinger ◽  
C. Ay

SummaryVenous thromboembolism (VTE) in patients with cancer is associated with an increased morbidity and mortality, and its prevention is of major clinical importance. However, the VTE rates in the cancer population vary between 0.5% - 20%, depending on cancer-, treatment- and patient-related factors. The most important contributors to VTE risk are the tumor entity, stage and certain anticancer treatments. Cancer surgery represents a strong risk factor for VTE, and medical oncology patients are at increased risk of developing VTE, especially when receiving chemotherapy or immunomodulatory drugs. Also biomarkers have been investigated for their usefulness to predict risk of VTE (e.g. elevated leukocyte and platelet counts, soluble P-selectin, D-dimer, etc.). In order to identify cancer patients at high risk of VTE and to improve risk stratification, risk assessment models have been developed, which contain both clinical parameters and biomarkers. While primary thromboprophylaxis with lowmolecular- weight-heparin (LMWH) is recommended postoperatively for a period of up to 4 weeks after major cancer surgery, the evidence is less clear for medical oncology patients. Thromboprophylaxis in hospitalized medical oncology patients is advocated, and is based on results of randomized controlled trials which evaluated the efficacy and safety of LMWH for prevention of VTE in hospitalized medically ill patients. In recent trials the benefit of primary thromboprophylaxis in cancer patients receiving chemotherapy in the ambulatory setting has been investigated. However, at the present stage primary thromboprophylaxis for prevention of VTE in these patients is still a matter of debate and cannot be recommended for all cancer outpatients.


2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
C Casamali ◽  
B Costa Martins ◽  
R Corsato Scomparim ◽  
LM Azeredo Coutinho ◽  
O Okazaki ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
Vol 25 (6) ◽  
pp. 2177-2192 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ilky Pollansky Silva e Farias ◽  
Simone Alves de Sousa ◽  
Leopoldina de Fátima Dantas de Almeida ◽  
Bianca Marques Santiago ◽  
Antonio Carlos Pereira ◽  
...  

Abstract This systematic review compared the oral health status between institutionalized and non-institutionalized elders. The following electronic databases were searched: PubMed (Medline), Scopus, Web of Science, Lilacs and Cochrane Library, in a comprehensive and unrestricted manner. Electronic searches retrieved 1687 articles, which were analyzed with regards to respective eligibility criteria. After reading titles and abstracts, five studies were included and analyzed with respect their methodological quality. Oral status of institutionalized and non-institutionalized elderly was compared through meta-analysis. Included articles involved a cross-sectional design, which investigated 1936 individuals aged 60 years and over, being 999 Institutionalized and 937 non-institutionalized elders. Studies have investigated the prevalence of edentulous individuals, the dental caries experience and the periodontal status. Meta-analysis revealed that institutionalized elderly have greater prevalence of edentulous (OR = 2.28, 95%CI = 1.68-3.07) and higher number of decayed teeth (MD = 0.88, 95%CI = 0.71-1.05) and missed teeth (MD = 4.58, 95%CI = 1.89-7.27). Poor periodontal status did not differ significantly between groups. Compared to non-institutionalized, institutionalized elders have worse dental caries experience.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document