A prospective, randomized study on the efficacy of tongue protector in patients with burning mouth syndrome

Comparison of Clonazepam and Tongue Protector in the Treatment of Burning Mouth Syndrome

Background: BMS is a chronic pain syndrome affecting the oral mucosa. It consists of experiencing a burning or dysesthetic sensation. BMS prevalence varies, with up to 15% among women. An effective treatment is still unattainable. Material and Methods: A total of 60 patients with BMS qualified for a randomised trial, divided in two groups: the clonazepam-treated and tongue protector group. Treatment was provided for 4 weeks in both groups. In the former, the oral dosage of clonazepam 0.5 mg; in the latter, a tongue protector was used. Clinical oral examination was performed, and the presence of taste disorder and pain intensity, on the visual analogues scale, were recorded. Psychological domains were explored with the Beck depression inventory (depression), Athens insomnia scale (insomnia), Eyesenck personality questionnaire-revised (personality traits), and WHO quality of life questionnaire (quality of life). Results: Complete recovery was observed in three patients after clonazepam and one patient after tongue guard treatment. A greater improvement in the VAS scores, from baseline to the control values, was demonstrated in the clonazepam group, and it was statistically significant. In women, the level of depression significantly correlated with all domains of quality of life. Conclusions: BMS is an ongoing multi-specialist challenge. The development of new pathophysiological concepts of BMS offers hope for more effective treatment. Considering the influence of BMS on the quality of life and mental disorders in most patients, further research on the possibilities of therapy seems to be very important.

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.

Oral appliances in the management of neuropathic orofacial pain: A retrospective case series

OBJECTIVE

Neuropathic orofacial pain disorders are frequently managed with topical or systemic medications that carry a risk of dangerous side effects such as drowsiness, disorientation, and/or physical addiction. The aim of this paper is to report the use of neurosensory oral appliances as a safe means of providing symptomatic relief for neuropathic orofacial pain.

STUDY DESIGN

This is a retrospective chart review of patients with diagnoses of persistent idiopathic facial pain (PIFP), painful post-traumatic trigeminal neuropathy (PTTN), or an oral dysesthesia, who utilized neurosensory appliances with or without the use of topical anesthetic gel.

RESULTS

Eleven patients were identified. Eight patients (62.5%) found benefit with the neurosensory appliance alone, and three patients (37.5%) found relief with the addition of lidocaine 2% gel. All patients reported >50% resolution of their symptoms, with three (37.5%) reporting complete resolution. Seven patients maintained follow-up ≥3 months, with efficacy lasting for a range of at least 3-8 months.

CONCLUSION

Oral neurosensory appliances, whether used alone as a physical barrier or as a vehicle to deliver topical anesthetic, represent a safe and effective modality for the management of neuropathic orofacial pain disorders. Additional studies are needed to assess long-term efficacy.

Evaluation of the efficacy of treatment modalities in burning mouth syndrome-A systematic review

OBJECTIVES

Burning mouth syndrome (BMS) is a medical entity characterised by a spontaneous sensation of burning, numbness or pain of the oral mucosa in the absence of clinical symptoms. The goal of this systematic review was to assess the efficacy of various current treatments for BMS.

METHODS

The literature search used the following inclusion criteria: randomised controlled trials (RCTs) which compared one or more treatment strategies for patients with primary/idiopathic BMS with a placebo group describing all types of interventions. The primary and secondary outcome measures included: relief of pain/burning sensations, changes in psychosocial factors and feeling of sensation of dryness. A computer and manual search was performed in Pubmed, Web of Science and Cochrane Library up to 5 November 2019 and updated on 28 June 2020. The risk of bias was measured with the Cochrane Collaboration tool.

RESULTS

Thirty RCTs which included 727 study participants and 589 controls were identified. The following interventions were introduced: dietary supplements, anticonvulsants, benzodiazepines, antidepressants, analgesics, topical agents, electromagnetic radiation or induction, physical barriers and psychological therapies. The most successful therapeutic outcomes were observed for clonazepam tested in 3 RCTs, where significant pain reduction appeared after both topical and systemic application. Evident pain reduction was also reported for tongue protectors and capsaicin in 2 separate studies.

DISCUSSION

Short follow-up periods, low numbers of participants, variability of the metrics used in the evaluation of the results and heterogeneous study design were the main limitations of the reviewed studies. Based on our analysis, clonazepam appears to be the most effective treatment option for BMS.

Burning Mouth Syndrome

Burning mouth syndrome is a chronic condition characterized by an intraoral burning sensation in the absence of a local or systemic cause.

Inflammasome and Oral Diseases

One of the main steps in the development of the life in the earth is multicellularity. It enables cell differentiation and the development of morphological structures within an organism and is an essential factor in how to recognize friendly cells that are part of the multicellular organism and which foreign organisms can be harmful. Recognition includes devices such as the major histocompatibility complex (MHC), and the pattern recognition receptors (PRRs). PRRs are a group of proteins expressed by cells of the innate immune system that identify two classes of products: pathogen-associated molecular patterns (PAMPs), related to microbial pathogens, and damage-associated molecular patterns (DAMPs), associated with cell components that are released during cell damage or death. All these activate the inflammasome, which is a multiprotein oligomer that includes caspase 1, PYCARD, NALP, and caspase 5 (also known as caspase 11 or ICH-3). It is responsible for activation of inflammatory processes and has been shown to induce cell pyroptosis, a programmed cell death distinct from apoptosis, and promotes the maturation of the inflammatory cytokines interleukin 1β (IL-1β) and interleukin 18 (IL-18). We review whether inflammasome is related to diseases that can occur in the oral cavity. The mouth is always a possible environment for the development of pathological conditions because of the wide variety of microorganisms. Small variations in the equilibrium of the oral flora can cause disorders that could affect the organism in a systemic form. We provide data on periodontal disease, candidiasis, herpes virus, oral cancer, caries, and other oral diseases. There are very few papers that study this issue; therefore, we need more investigation and publications about inflammatory molecular processes, and more specifically, related to the inflammasome complex.

Interventions for treating burning mouth syndrome

BACKGROUND

Burning mouth syndrome (BMS) is a term used for oral mucosal pain (burning pain or discomfort in the tongue, lips or entire oral cavity) without identifiable cause. General population prevalence varies from 0.1% to 3.9%. Many BMS patients indicate anxiety, depression, personality disorders and impaired quality of life (QoL). This review updates the previous versions published in 2000 and 2005.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effectiveness and safety of any intervention versus placebo for symptom relief and changes in QoL, taste, and feeling of dryness in people with BMS.

SEARCH METHODS

Cochrane Oral Health's Information Specialist searched the following databases: Cochrane Oral Health's Trials Register (to 31 December 2015), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2015, Issue 11) in the Cochrane Library (searched 31 December 2015), MEDLINE Ovid (1946 to 31 December 2015), and Embase Ovid (1980 to 31 December 2015). We searched ClinicalTrials.gov and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform for ongoing trials. We placed no restrictions on the language or date of publication when searching the electronic databases SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing any treatment against placebo in people with BMS. The primary outcomes were symptom relief (pain/burning) and change in QoL. Secondary outcomes included change in taste, feeling of dryness, and adverse effects.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. Outcome data were analysed as short-term (up to three months) or long-term (three to six months).

MAIN RESULTS

We included 23 RCTs (1121 analysed participants; 83% female). Interventions were categorised as: antidepressants and antipsychotics, anticonvulsants, benzodiazepines, cholinergics, dietary supplements, electromagnetic radiation, physical barriers, psychological therapies, and topical treatments.Only one RCT was assessed at low risk of bias overall, four RCTs' risk of bias was unclear, and 18 studies were at high risk of bias. Overall quality of the evidence for effectiveness was very low for all interventions and all outcomes.Twenty-one RCTs assessed short-term symptom relief. There is very low-quality evidence of benefit from electromagnetic radiation (one RCT, 58 participants), topical benzodiazepines (two RCTs, 111 participants), physical barriers (one RCT, 50 participants), and anticonvulsants (one RCT, 100 participants). We found insufficient/contradictory evidence regarding the effectiveness of antidepressants, cholinergics, systemic benzodiazepines, dietary supplements or topical treatments. No RCT assessing psychological therapies evaluated short-term symptom relief.Four studies assessed long-term symptom relief. There is very low-quality evidence of a benefit from psychological therapies (one RCT, 30 participants), capsaicin oral rinse (topical treatment) (one RCT, 18 participants), and topical benzodiazepines (one RCT, 66 participants). We found no evidence of a difference for dietary supplements or lactoperoxidase oral rinse. No studies assessing antidepressants, anticonvulsants, cholinergics, electromagnetic radiation or physical barriers evaluated long-term symptom relief.Short-term change in QoL was assessed by seven studies (none long-term).The quality of evidence was very low. A benefit was found for electromagnetic radiation (one RCT, 58 participants), however findings were inconclusive for antidepressants, benzodiazepines, dietary supplements and physical barriers.Secondary outcomes (change in taste and feeling of dryness) were only assessed short-term, and the findings for both were also inconclusive.With regard to adverse effects, there is very low-quality evidence that antidepressants increase dizziness and drowsiness (one RCT, 37 participants), and that alpha lipoic acid increased headache (two RCTs, 118 participants) and gastrointestinal complaints (3 RCTs, 138 participants). We found insufficient/contradictory evidence regarding adverse events for anticonvulsants or benzodiazepines. Adverse events were poorly reported or unreported for cholinergics, electromagnetic radiation, and psychological therapies. No adverse events occurred from physical barriers or topical therapy use.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Given BMS' potentially disabling nature, the need to identify effective modes of treatment for sufferers is vital. Due to the limited number of clinical trials at low risk of bias, there is insufficient evidence to support or refute the use of any interventions in managing BMS. Further clinical trials, with improved methodology and standardised outcome sets are required in order to establish which treatments are effective. Future studies are encouraged to assess the role of treatments used in other neuropathic pain conditions and psychological therapies in the treatment of BMS.

A systematic review of randomized trials for the treatment of burning mouth syndrome

OBJECTIVES

Burning mouth syndrome (BMS) is characterized by burning of the oral mucosa in the absence of underlying dental or medical causes. The results of previous systematic reviews have generally been equivocal. However, findings for most interventions are based on searches of 5-10years ago. This study therefore updates previous searches of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) for pain as assessed by Visual Analogue Scales (VAS). Secondary outcomes included quality of life, mood, taste and salivary flow.

METHODS

A search of MEDLINE and Embase up to 2016.

RESULTS

24 RCTs were identified. Meta-analyses were impossible because of wide variations in study method and quality. The commonest interventions were alpha-lipoic acid (ALA) (8 comparisons), capsaicin or an analogue (4 comparisons), clonazepam (3 comparisons) and psychotherapy (2 comparisons). ALA and capsaicin led to significantly greater improvements in VAS (4 studies each), as did clonazepam (all 3 studies), at up to two month follow-up. However, capsaicin led to prominent dyspepsia. Psychotherapy significantly improved outcomes in one study at two and 12month follow-up. Catauma and tongue-protectors also showed promise (one study each). There were no significant differences in any of the secondary outcomes except in the one study of tongue protectors.

CONCLUSIONS

At least in some studies and for some outcomes, ALA, clonazepam, capsaicin and psychotherapy may show modest benefit in the first two months. However, these conclusions are limited by generally short follow-up periods, high study variability and low participant numbers. Further RCTs with follow-up of at least 12months are indicated.

DEEP Study: does EQ-5D-5L measure the impacts of persistent oro-facial pain?

The EQ-5D-5L is a generic quality of life (QOL) measure widely used throughout the world, which has the advantage that it allows health-state preferences to be elicited. The aim of this study was to examine whether: a) variation in the standardised reference period for EQ-5D-5L from 'today' to 'the last month' had a minimal clinically meaningful difference; (b) EQ-5D-5L had convergent validity with a multidimensional pain measure in quantifying the impacts of pain. As part of a larger study into the effectiveness and efficiency of care pathways for persistent orofacial pain (POFP) (http://research.ncl.ac.uk/deepstudy), participants with POFP (n = 100) completed two versions of the EQ-5D-5L at the same time with different reference periods ('today' vs. 'last month'). Participants also completed the first section of the West Haven-Yale Multidimensional Pain Inventory (v3) to assess convergent validity. Two-tailed nonparametric inferential statistics, intra-class correlation coefficients (ICC), and within-subject change scores were used to compare the two EQ-5D-5L versions. Convergent validity was assessed using Spearman's rho correlation coefficients. Health-state valuations were significantly different (P < 0.01), and there was good similarity between the two versions' ICC 0.86 (95% CI 0.79-0.91). The within-subject mean change was 0.03 (95% CI 0.01-0.06). For convergent validity, all relationships were significant (P < 0.05) and in the expected directions. EQ-5D-5L demonstrates sufficient convergent validity to be used with POFP, and a change in the standard reference period may be unnecessary if a multidimensional pain measure is also used.

Peculiar alexithymic traits in burning mouth syndrome: case-control study

OBJECTIVES

The present case-control study aims to assess the occurrence of alexithymic traits in burning mouth syndrome (BMS) subjects and to correlate alexithymic traits to anxious and depressive traits in BMS subjects.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Prospectively enrolled BMS and control subjects were administered the 20-item Toronto Alexithymia Scale (TAS-20). Anxiety and depressive traits were assessed using the Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale and the Montgomery and Asberg Depression Rating Scale. Occurrence of alexithymic traits was compared between BMS and control subjects. Correlation tests were used to measure the importance of alexithymic traits related to demographic characteristics, pain intensity (VAS score), and to the other psychometric scores.

RESULTS

Fifty-eight BMS subjects (46 females and 12 males) had a mean TAS-20 score significantly higher when compared to controls (p < 0.001; r = 0.72), corresponding to an occurrence rate of alexithymic traits of 79.3 versus 6.9%. Alexithymic traits in BMS subjects were just related to depressive traits (p = 0.02; ρ = 0.31).

CONCLUSIONS

The high occurrence of alexithymia in BMS is an adjunctive issue in favor of its multifactorial pathogenesis, with a not negligible role for somatization.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Clinicians should be aware of the high occurrence of alexithymic traits among BMS subjects as such traits may affect the doctor-patient relationship.

Therapeutic options in idiopathic burning mouth syndrome: literature review

Introduction Burning mouth syndrome (BMS) is characterized by a burning sensation in the tongue, palate, lips, or gums of no well-defined etiology. The diagnosis and treatment for primary BMS are controversial. No specific laboratory tests or diagnostic criteria are well established, and the diagnosis is made by excluding all other possible disorders.

Objective To review the literature on the main treatment options in idiopathic BMS and compare the best results of the main studies in 15 years.

Data Synthesis We conducted a literature review on PubMed/MEDLINE, SciELO, and Cochrane-BIREME of work in the past 15 years, and only selected studies comparing different therapeutic options in idiopathic BMS, with preference for randomized and double-blind controlled studies.

Final Comments Topical clonazepam showed good short-term results for the relief of pain, although this was not presented as a definitive cure. Similarly, α-lipoic acid showed good results, but there are few randomized controlled studies that showed the long-term results and complete remission of symptoms. On the other hand, cognitive therapy is reported as a good and lasting therapeutic option with the advantage of not having side effects, and it can be combined with pharmacologic therapy.

The impact of burning mouth syndrome on health-related quality of life

BACKGROUND

Burning mouth syndrome is a chronic disorder that is characterized by a burning sensation and a normal clinical appearance of the oral mucosa. This condition often affects the health-related quality of life in patients. As such, the aim of this study was to compare the health-related quality of life of patients with BMS and healthy controls, using the validated Portuguese versions of the SF-36 and OHIP-49 questionnaires.

METHODS

A calculated sample of Brazilian patients with BMS (n = 26) was compared with a control group (n = 27), paired for gender and age. Sociodemographic information and clinical characteristics were obtained, and interviews were conducted using the SF-36 and OHIP-49. To evaluate the normality of the variables, we used the Kolmogorov-Smirnov test. The chi-square test, Fisher exact test and Mann-Whitney U-Test were used to compare sociodemographic and clinical characteristics of individuals with BMS and controls Mann-Whitney U-test were carried out to compare SF-36 and OHIP-49 between BMS patients and controls. The significance level was set at 0.05. To compare the dimensions of the SF-36 and OHIP-49 between BMS patients and controls, we considered Bonferroni correction. So for comparison of the dimensions, the significance level was set at 0.00625 for SF-36 and at 0.00714 for OHIP-49.

RESULTS

The clinical and demographic data were similar in both groups (P > 0.05). SF-36 scores were significantly lower in all domains for patients with BMS (P < 0.00625). OHIP-49 scores were higher for individuals with BMS (P < 0.00714).

CONCLUSIONS

BMS has a negative impact on the health-related quality of life of individuals, as can be shown by instruments such as the SF-36 and OHIP-49. So, the evaluation of quality of life might be useful for more information about the nature and severity of BMS, to evaluate the effects of treatment protocols, in order to improve their outcomes by means a humanized clinical practice.