Pain-relieving effects of clonazepam and amitriptyline in burning mouth syndrome: a retrospective study

Efficacy of Danzhixiaoyao tablets combined with methylcobalamin tablets in the treatment of burning mouth syndrome: an open-label, randomized controlled trial

OBJECTIVES

This randomized controlled trial compared the efficacy and tolerability of danzhixiaoyao pills in the accurate treatment of patients with burning mouth syndrome (BMS).

METHOD

Collect a total of 78 patients (75 female patients and 3 male patients) from the oral mucosa department who were considered eligible fromOctober 2020 to October 2022.The patients were randomized and divided into trial group and control group.The trail group received danzhixiaoyao pills and mecobalamine tablets while the control group was given mecobalamine tablets.The Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), Beck Anxiety Inventory(BAI), Beck Depression Inventory (BDI), Oral Health Impact Profile (OHIP-14), Traditional Chinese medicine(TCM) syndrome integral and adverse reactions were performed at baseline and after 2, 4, and 6 weeks of treatment. Descriptive statistics, including the Wilcoxon rank-sum test and the Chi-square test for median comparisons between different times, were used.

RESULT

1.After treatment, the VAS, BDI,OHIP-14, and TCM syndrome integral in the trial group had a significant decrease than the control group(P< 0.05).However, there was no statistical difference in the BAI scores between the two groups (P> 0.05). 2.According to the efficacy determination criteria , the total effective rate of the test group was 73.68% , the control group was 52.94% and the recurrence rate was 0. There was a significant difference between the two groups (Z=-2.688, P < 0.05). The results showed that the curative effect of test group was better than that of control group.3. No adverse effects occurred in patients in either group.

CONCLUSION

Danzhixiaoyao pills has demonstrated to have a positive effect in relieving BMS symptoms and in improving a patient's overall quality of life with no AEs compared with the control group. The efficacy evaluation systems that can be verified and complementary in this study provide a perfect, effective and referential evaluation system for the use of Chinese patent medicine in the treatment of oral mucosal diseases.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Registry name: Chinese Clinical trail Registry Registration number: ChiCTR2000038189 Date of Registration: 2020-09-13 Please visit ( https://www.chictr.org.cn/showproj.html?proj=61462 ) to the protocol.

Burning mouth in oncology care: a systematic review

Burning mouth, also referred to as oral dysesthesia, is an underreported condition among cancer patients that may represent an early symptom of cancer or an adverse effect of treatment. This review sought to characterize this symptom in oncology care where burning symptoms may occur. A systematic review of the literature was performed based on the PRISMA statement, and the protocol was registered at PROSPERO database. A structured search was done using eight databases. The process of study selection was conducted in two distinct phases. The JBI Critical Appraisal Tools were utilized to evaluate the risk of bias in the studies included. Of the total number of studies assessed, sixteen met the eligibility criteria. Of these studies included, 7 were case reports, 7 cross-sectional studies, and 2 non-randomized clinical trials. Most studies presented low risk of bias (n = 9), while the remaining studies were evaluated and scored as moderate (n = 5) or high (n = 2) risk of bias. Burning mouth was reported as a first symptom of cancer in three studies, and as an adverse event of radiotherapy (n = 2), chemoradiotherapy (n = 2), and chemotherapy (n = 9). Burning mouth was a first symptom in 0.62% of oral squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC), and 3.3% of patients with pain as chief complaint. Oral dysesthesia prevalence was 13.6% in patients experiencing chemotherapy-induced oral adverse events. The symptom of burning mouth should be examined in oncology care, as it may be underreported and therefore undertreated. New therapies may be related to a higher risk of oral burning and studies assessing approach to management are needed. Current management borrows from the current management of burning mouth in the non-cancer setting.

Clinical and epidemiological profile of burning mouth syndrome patients following the International Headache Society classification: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

This systematic review aimed to determine the clinical and epidemiologic profile of patients with burning mouth syndrome (BMS) following the current classification of the International Headache Society (IHS)-the International Classification of Headache Disorders (ICHD-3) and the International Classification of Orofacial Pain (ICOP).

STUDY DESIGN

This review followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses checklist and involved a comprehensive search on PubMed, Scopus, EMBASE, Web of Science, LILACS, and the gray literature.

RESULTS

Of the 4,252 studies identified, 41 were included. In general, there were no differences between the clinical and epidemiologic profiles of patients with BMS classified based on ICHD-3 or ICOP. Studies were pooled in meta-analyses and showed a significant prevalence of female patients between the sixth and seventh decade of life. The burning sensation and the tongue were the most prevalent descriptors and affected location. Significant associations were demonstrated between BMS and anxiety (P = .0006), depression (P = .004), and poor oral hygiene (P = .00001).

CONCLUSIONS

Under the existing contemporary classification systems, patients with BMS were found to be mostly females in the sixth and seventh decade of life with a burning sensation on the tongue. Experiencing depression and anxiety was a commonly existing comorbidity.

Is burning mouth syndrome associated with stress? A meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Some studies have shown burning mouth syndrome (BMS) as comorbid psychosocial and psychiatric disorders, and as well, pointed at stress as a major risk factor.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this meta-analysis was to answer the following question: 'Is there an association between BMS and stress, compared to healthy controls?'

METHODS

Two reviewers searched for the effect of stress in BMS and published on five main databases and three from the grey literature. Various questionnaires and biomarkers were analysed. Of the 2489 selected articles, 30 met the inclusion criteria. Studies englobed questionnaires, such as Perceived Stress Questionnaire, Lipp Stress Symptoms Inventory, Holmes-Rahe scale, Depression, Anxiety, and Stress Scale (DASS-21), Recent Experience Test; and various biomarkers, such as cortisol, opiorphin, IgA, α-amylase and interleukins.

RESULTS

In all studies with questionnaires, stress was significantly increased in the BMS group vs. control. Patients with BMS presented 25.73% higher cortisol levels, 28.17% higher IgA levels and 40.62% higher α-amylase levels than controls. Meta-analysis found that BMS subjects presented 3.01 nmoL/L [0.53; 5.50] higher cortisol levels, 84.35 kU/L [15.00; 153.71] higher α-amylase levels, 29.25 mg/mL [9.86; 48.64] higher IgA levels and 258.59 pg/mL [59.24; 457.94] higher IL-8 levels than control. No differences were found for opiorphin concentration in ng/mL [-0.96; 2.53]. For interleukins, no differences were founded for IL-1 β, IL-2, IL-4, IL-6, IL-8, IL-10 and TNF-α.

CONCLUSION

Based on the available evidence, this meta-analysis suggests more stress factors in questionnaire-based studies, and higher levels of cortisol, α-amylase, IgA and IL-8 biomarkers in BMS subjects than controls.

A systematic review of treatment for patients with burning mouth syndrome

BACKGROUND

Burning mouth syndrome is a chronic idiopathic intractable intraoral dysaesthesia that remains a challenge to clinicians due to its poorly understood pathogenesis and inconsistent response to various treatments.

AIM

This review aimed to study the short- (≤3 months) and long-term (>3 months) effectiveness and sustainable benefit of different burning mouth syndrome treatment strategies and the associated side effects.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Randomised controlled trials of burning mouth syndrome treatment compared with placebo or other interventions with a minimum follow up of 2 months were searched from the PubMed, Embase and Cochrane database (published to July 2020).

RESULTS

Twenty-two studies were selected based on the inclusion and exclusion criteria and analysed. Nine categories of burning mouth syndrome treatment were identified: Anticonvulsant and antidepressant agents, phytomedicine and alpha lipoic acid supplements, low-level laser therapy, saliva substitute, transcranial magnetic stimulation, and cognitive behaviour therapy. Cognitive behaviour therapy, topical capsaicin and clonazepam, and laser therapy demonstrated favourable outcome in both short- and long-term assessment. Phytomedicines reported a short-term benefit in pain score reduction. The pooled effect of alpha lipoic acid (ALA) pain score improvement was low, but its positive effects increased in long term assessment.

CONCLUSION

A more significant volume in terms of sample size, multi-centres, and multi-arm comparison of therapeutic agents with placebo and longitudinal follow-up studies is recommended to establish a standardised burning mouth syndrome treatment protocol. Further studies are required to assess the analgesic benefits of topical clonazepam and capsaicin, alternative medicines with neurodegenerative prevention capability and psychology support in treating burning mouth syndrome and reducing systemic adverse drug reactions.Registration International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO):Protocol ID - CRD42020160892.

Burning mouth syndrome: a review of therapeutic approach

Burning mouth syndrome (BMS) is described by an intense burning sensation of the tongue or other oral areas without a clear etiopathology. The diagnosis of BMS is challenging due to variations of manifestations. The management of BMS is complicated due to the complex etiology of the disease. Many medications and treatment methods have been recommended for BMS management, but no one confirmed as the standard method. In this study, the therapeutic approaches of BMS were evaluated. The data of the article was obtained from PubMed/MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science. The following terms including "burning mouth syndrome", "therapy", and "treatment" were used for search in the databases. A wide range of articles about the therapeutic approach of BMS was searched and reviewed. Pharmacological and non-pharmacological approaches have been used for BMS management. Pharmacological treatments are including Capsaicin, Clonazepam, Low-dose aripiprazole, Alpha-lipoic acid, Duloxetine, Amitriptyline, Gabapentin, and Pregabalin, and ultra-micronized palmitoylethanolamide. Non-pharmacological therapies for BMS are cognitive therapy, Electroconvulsive therapy, Laser therapy, Acupuncture and auriculotherapy, Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (rTMS), Salivary Mechanical Stimulation, and Botulinum Toxin. A detailed assessment of the etiology and pathophysiology of BMS, and having information about novel therapeutic interventions are essential for the management of BMS.

Vortioxetine in the Treatment of Mood Disorders Associated with Burning Mouth Syndrome: Results of an Open-Label, Flexible-Dose Pilot Study

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the efficacy of a new multimodal antidepressant, vortioxetine (VO), in the management of burning mouth syndrome (BMS).

DESIGN

Longitudinal single-assessment open-label pilot study.

SETTING

University hospital. Subjects. Thirty BMS patients were enrolled.

METHODS

BMS patients were treated with topical clonazepam and a flexible dose of VO (10 mg, 15 mg, or 20 mg). The visual analog scale (VAS), the Total Pain Rating Index (T-PRI), the Hamilton Rating Scales for Depression (HAM-D) and Anxiety (HAM-A), and the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI) were performed at baseline (time 0) and after two (time 1), four (time 2), six (time 3), and 12 months (time 4) of treatment. Descriptive statistics and the Wilcoxon nonparametric test for two paired samples were used.

RESULTS

The BMS patients showed a statistically significant improvement in VAS and T-PRI scores from baseline (median [interquartile range {IQR}] = 10.0 [10-10] and 22.0 [20-24], respectively) to time 4 (median [IQR] = 0.0 [0-0] and 8.0 [7-9], P < 0.001, respectively). Similarly, the HAM-A and HAM-D and PSQI scores showed an improvement from time 0 (median [IQR] = 20 [15.8-22], 19 [16-20.3], and 4.0 [4-7.3], respectively) to time 4 (median [IQR] = 6.0 [6-7], 6.0 [6-7], and 3.0 [3-4], respectively, P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

VO is efficacious and well tolerated in the treatment of BMS in firstline therapy on account of its better receptor pharmacological profile and in second-line treatment for patients who have only partially responded or have reported adverse effects to previous treatments.

Burning mouth syndrome: An update

Background:

Burning mouth syndrome (BMS) is a chronic and debilitating oral pain of the normal oral mucosa. It mainly affects women in their fifth to seventh decade. Its aetiopathogenesis remains unclear and is probably of multifactorial origin, with increasing evidence that BMS may be a neuropathic disorder. BMS is classified as an idiopathic (nociplastic) orofacial pain with or without somatosensory changes by International Classification of Orofacial Pain (ICOP 2020). The diagnosis of BMS, having excluded ‘oral burning mouth symptoms’, has evolved from basic intraoral exclusion screening to extensive clinical and laboratory investigations, which include the screening of comorbidities and other chronic pains and somatosensory testing. There is no standardised treatment in managing BMS, but a proposed combination of supportive and pharmacological treatment has been recommended.

Aim:

To review the current concepts of BMS definitions, classifications, aetiopathogenesis, diagnosis techniques, and evidence-based treatments in managing BMS patients.

Conclusion:

As BMS is a diagnosis by exclusion, thus a stratified approach is required for assessment of patients presenting BMS. A BMS diagnosis protocol is desired using a standardised screening to distinguish BMS from patient’s presenting with ‘oral burning symptoms’, and evaluation of comorbid chronic pain disorders or other medical comorbidities, which will include haematological, fungal, salivary flow, and qualitative sensory testing. Axis II and other additional quantitative sensory testing may further elucidate the causes of this condition. For future BMS prediction and prevention, will be based upon research on the relationship between other chronic pain disorders and familial history, environmental and genetic information.

Treatment outcomes and related clinical characteristics in patients with burning mouth syndrome

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the treatment outcomes of medication therapies in patients with burning mouth syndrome (BMS) and to identify the clinical characteristics that may affect the efficacy of prescribed medications.

METHODS

This is a retrospective study of 769 patients with oral burning sensations. Of these patients, 420 patients diagnosed as the primary BMS received an "Initial Approach" that involved a detailed explanation about its etiopathophysiology, self-care instruction, and use of an oral lubricant. Neuropathic medications were prescribed for 277 patients who did not respond to the initial approach. Clinical characteristics, prescribed medications, and changes in intensity of oral symptoms were reviewed.

RESULTS

Clonazepam was administered as the first-line medication. Alpha-lipoic acid (ALA), gabapentin, and nortriptyline were commonly administered in combination with clonazepam. More than two-thirds of the patients reported a marked improvement in oral symptoms after treatments with combination of neuropathic medications and ALA. The efficacies of the initial approach and clonazepam had significant positive associations with the initial intensity of oral symptoms and significant negative associations with depression.

CONCLUSIONS

Clonazepam therapy in combination with appropriate medications was effective for managing patients with BMS. The initial intensity of oral symptoms and psychological status were significantly associated with treatment outcomes.

Limited Utility for Benzodiazepines in Chronic Pain Management: A Narrative Review

INTRODUCTION

Controversy and uncertainty exist about the use of benzodiazepine receptor agonists (BZRAs) in pain management. This article curates available research to determine the appropriate role of BZRAs in the course of pain management, and how prescribers might address these challenges.

METHODS

A narrative review was performed to determine the appropriate role of BZRAs in pain management and to develop practice recommendations. Publications were identified by a search of PubMed, references of retrieved reports, guidelines, and the author's personal files.

RESULTS

BZRAs were found to have analgesic benefit for two pain conditions: burning mouth syndrome and stiff person syndrome. Absence of research, heterogeneity of trials, and small sample sizes precluded drawing conclusions about efficacy of BZRAs for the other 109 pain conditions explored. Data supports the use of BZRAs to treat co-occurring insomnia and anxiety disorders but only when alternatives are inadequate and only for short periods of time (2-4 weeks). The utility of BZRAs is limited by loss of efficacy that may be seen with continued use and adverse reactions including physiologic dependence which develops in 20-100% of those who take these agents for more than a month.

CONCLUSIONS

BZRAs are often used inappropriately in pain management. Their initiation and duration of use should be limited to a narrow range of conditions. When prescribed for 4 weeks or more, patients should be encouraged to discontinue them through a supported, slow tapering process that may take 12-18 months or longer.

Current management strategies for the pain of elderly patients with burning mouth syndrome: a critical review

Burning Mouth Syndrome (BMS), a chronic intraoral burning sensation or dysesthesia without clinically evident causes, is one of the most common medically unexplained oral symptoms/syndromes. Even though the clinical features of BMS have been astonishingly common and consistent throughout the world for hundreds of years, BMS remains an enigma and has evolved to more intractable condition. In fact, there is a large and growing number of elderly BMS patients for whom the disease is accompanied by systemic diseases, in addition to aging physical change, which makes the diagnosis and treatment of BMS more difficult. Because the biggest barrier preventing us from finding the core pathophysiology and best therapy for BMS seems to be its heterogeneity, this syndrome remains challenging for clinicians. In this review, we discuss currently hopeful management strategies, including central neuromodulators (Tricyclic Antidepressants - TCAs, Serotonin, and Norepinephrine Reuptake Inhibitors - SNRIs, Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitors - SSRIs, Clonazepam) and solutions for applying non-pharmacology approaches. Moreover, we also emphasize the important role of patient education and anxiety management to improve the patients’ quality of life. A combination of optimized medication with a short-term supportive psychotherapeutic approach might be a useful solution.

Therapeutic Dose of Amitriptyline for Older Patients with Burning Mouth Syndrome

OBJECTIVE

To assess the therapeutic dose and safety of amitriptyline and the outcome following treatment with amitriptyline among older patients with burning mouth syndrome (BMS).

METHODS

187 consecutive patients were prescribed amitriptyline as a first-line medication from April 2016 to September 2018 and followed-up for >1 month. Patients were divided into 3 groups: group 1, 113 patients aged <65 years; group 2, 52 patients aged between 65 and 74 years; and group 3, 22 patients aged 75 years or older. The visual analog scale (VAS), Pain Catastrophizing Scale (PCS), Somatic Symptom Scale-8 (SSS-8), Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC), and Short-form McGill Pain Questionnaire (SF-MPQ) were used for analysis.

RESULTS

Thirty-two patients (17 in group 1, 10 in group 2, and 5 in group 3) stopped taking amitriptyline due to side effects. There were no differences among the groups with respect to sex; scores of VAS, PCS, and SSS-8; and drop-out ratio. There were no significant differences in the VAS, PCS, and PGIC scores among the groups after 1 month. The mean daily dose after 1 month was 20.4 ± 8.6 mg in group 1, 17.3 ± 8.7 mg in group 2, and 13.2 ± 5.8 mg in group 3; this difference was significant (p value = 0.003). About 76% of patients showed improvements in their symptoms (PGIC ≥ 3). About 90% of patients reported side effects. No serious side effects occurred.

CONCLUSION

The therapeutic dose of amitriptyline may be lower for older BMS patients than for younger patients.

Psycho-stomatodynia

Introduction:Burning mouth syndrome is an enigmatic condition whose etiopathogenic origin remains largely unknown and whose treatment remains unsatisfactory. It is often considered to be of “psychosomatic” origin, and this etiology is frequently reported in the French medical literature.Corpus:This narrative review examines the arguments supporting this point of view, in its historical, clinical, and therapeutic aspects, in order to shed light on the patientʼs point of view.Conclusion:The etiopathogenic uncertainty does not let us give the patient an erroneous conception of the affliction.

Recent Advances in the Etiology and Treatment of Burning Mouth Syndrome

Burning mouth syndrome (BMS) is a debilitating condition that has a striking female predilection. Although the oral mucosa is normal in appearance, patients with BMS experience oral burning that most commonly localizes to the lips and tongue. BMS is a diagnosis of exclusion, and all underlying pathoses associated with allodynia must be ruled out prior to rendering the diagnosis. The etiopathogenesis of BMS remains poorly understood, and thus patient management is challenging. Data indicate that oral and systemic factors both contribute to the development and persistence of the condition. Of particular interest, emerging work identifies structural and functional deficits within the nervous system that may lead to a more mechanistic understanding of BMS pathology. In addition, several novel findings suggest that circadian rhythm dysfunction may be a previously unappreciated yet clinically significant driver of disease. Circadian rhythm controls pain perception, mood, and sleep and plays a key role in the regulation of the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis. Since these are altered in patients with BMS, this may be reflective of underlying circadian dysfunction. While evidence-based treatment strategies for BMS are lacking, current treatment approaches consist of local and systemic medications, such as clonazepam, alpha lipoic acid, capsaicin, low-level laser therapy, gabapentin, and amitriptylin. In addition, the use of cognitive behavioral therapy is reported. This review provides an overview of the recent literature related to the etiology and treatment of BMS and identifies current challenges facing researchers and clinicians alike.