Efficacy of lycopene-enriched virgin olive oil for treating burning mouth syndrome: a double-blind randomised

Efficacy of cranial electrotherapy stimulation in patients with burning mouth syndrome: a randomized, controlled, double-blind pilot study

Background

The Burning mouth syndrome (BMS) is a chronic pain syndrome characterized by a burning sensation in the oral mucous membranes. The etiology and pathophysiology of BMS is largely unexplained. To date, there is no evidence-based treatment strategy for BMS. Cranial electrical stimulation (CES) represents a non-invasive treatment option with a low side effect profile that is approved for the treatment of pain, depression, anxiety disorder and insomnia. It has shown efficacy in studies for chronic pain such as fibromyalgia and neuropathic pain after spinal cord injury. This study aimed to investigate the therapeutic effectiveness of CES in combination with local transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) as an adjunct therapy in patients with BMS compared to sham stimulation.

Methods

This randomized, double-blind, sham-controlled pilot study enrolled 22 patients, aged 18 years and over, with the diagnosis of BMS meeting the ICHD-3 criteria from August 2020 to June 2021. The study duration was 4 weeks (28 days) per participant. After randomization, the active group participants (n = 11) received a 100 μA CES treatment for 60 min a day whereas the devices in the Sham group did not emit electricity. Simple linear regression was used to determine whether the interventions promoted significant differences in pain intensity.

Results

The linear regression showed that the period of stimulation significantly predicted decrease in the intensity of pain in the active group [β = -0.036; t(26) = -7.219; p < 0.001] as in the sham group [β = -0.026; t(26) = -2.56; p < 0.017]. With the applied cutoff of 30% pain reduction within the stimulation period, both the active and sham groups had 36% responders (n = 4) (Fisher's exact test, p = 1.00). In both groups (active stimulation and sham group), a significant decrease in the intensity of pain, somatic symptoms and an improvement in sleep quality over the study period was observed. Subjects reported no adverse events during the study.

Conclusion

Although CES is an easily applicable and safe therapeutic option for chronic facial pain, active stimulation was not superior to sham stimulation. Among other reasons, this could be due to the short double-blinded treatment period, duration of the daily stimulation session or the small sample size.

Micronutrients status as a contributing factor in secondary burning mouth syndrome: A review of the literature

Background and Aims

Patients with burning mouth syndrome (BMS) experience an annoying feeling without clinical evidence of any mucosal lesion. Deficiency or excess of micronutrients is a common feature in secondary BMS. There is limited knowledge among oral healthcare providers regarding the significance of micronutrients in oral health, so the current review focuses on the critical role of these elements in oral health implications as secondary BMS.

Methods

For the data collection, the authors searched for key terms without time limitation (1900-2021) in databases comprised of PubMed, Google Scholar, Scopus, Web of Science (SCI), and Embase.

Results

The total number of matched articles with inclusion criteria involved in this review article was 59 original articles. Among these, 20 randomized clinical trials (RCT), 31 case-control or Crossectional, and 8 case reports/series are reviewed in this review article.

Conclusion

One of the important etiological factors in patients with secondary BMS is micronutrient imbalance. The iron, zinc, vitamin B family, vitamin D deficiency and increased levels of homocysteine and oxidant agents were examined in secondary BMS patients. In addition, oral medicine specialists must consider the possible toxic effects of some elements in restorations and dental prostheses. Further studies, such as RCTs in the future, are recommended.

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.

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.

Preventive effect of extra virgin olive oil on pressure injury development: A randomized controlled trial in Turkey

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Different moisturizing products are used in the prevention of pressure injuries, but there is a limited number of studies on the effectiveness of extra virgin olive oil, which is an herbal and natural product. The aim of this study was to examine the effect of topically applied extra virgin olive oil on the prevention of pressure injuries.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

This was a randomized controlled experimental study conducted between February and October 2015 with a total of 129 patients, of whom 64 were in the control group and 65 in the extra virgin olive oil group.

RESULTS

16.9% of patients in the extra virgin olive oil group (n = 11) and 32.8% of patients in the control group (n = 21) developed pressure injuries, and the difference was found to be statistically significant.

CONCLUSION

This study showed that the application of extra virgin olive oil is effective in preventing pressure injuries.

A pragmatic evidence-based clinical management algorithm for burning mouth syndrome

Background

Burning mouth syndrome is a poorly understood disease process with no current standard of treatment. The goal of this article is to provide an evidence-based, practical, clinical algorithm as a guideline for the treatment of burning mouth syndrome.

Material and Methods

Using available evidence and clinical experience, a multi-step management algorithm was developed. A retrospective cohort study was then performed, following STROBE statement guidelines, comparing outcomes of patients who were managed using the algorithm and those who were managed without.

Results

Forty-seven patients were included in the study, with 21 (45%) managed using the algorithm and 26 (55%) managed without. The mean age overall was 60.4 ±16.5 years, and most patients (39, 83%) were female. Cohorts showed no statistical difference in age, sex, overall follow-up time, dysgeusia, geographic tongue, or psychiatric disorder; xerostomia, however, was significantly different, skewed toward the algorithm group. Significantly more non-algorithm patients did not continue care (69% vs. 29%, p=0.001). The odds ratio of not continuing care for the non-algorithm group compared to the algorithm group was 5.6 [1.6, 19.8]. Improvement in pain was significantly more likely in the algorithm group (p=0.001), with an odds ratio of 27.5 [3.1, 242.0].

Conclusions

We present a basic clinical management algorithm for burning mouth syndrome which may increase the likelihood of pain improvement and patient follow-up.

Key words:Burning mouth syndrome, burning tongue, glossodynia, oral pain, oral burning, therapy, treatment.

Beneficial effects of specific natural substances on oral health

Substances that are consumed daily or occasionally may influence an individual’s oral health. Some substances, such as alcohol, tobacco, and areca nut, adversely affect the oral region. However, some other substances, such as honey and green tea, which have antimicrobial properties, and berries, which have anticarcinogenic potential, exhibit beneficial effects on oral health. The effectiveness of synthetic drugs in maintaining oral health cannot be ignored; however, the benefits of synthetic drugs are associated with adverse effects and high costs. By contrast, the medicinal use of natural substances is associated with safety, affordability, and long-term benefits. In this paper, we review various natural substances that are potentially beneficial to oral health.

Burning mouth syndrome: a systematic review of treatments

Burning mouth syndrome (BMS) is a chronic oral pain syndrome that primarily affects peri- and postmenopausal women. It is characterized by oral mucosal burning and may be associated with dysgeusia, paresthesia, dysesthesia, and xerostomia. The etiology of the disease process is unknown, but is thought to be neuropathic in origin. The goal of this systematic review was to assess the efficacy of the various treatments for BMS. Literature searches were conducted through PubMed, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library databases, which identified 22 randomized controlled trials. Eight studies examined alpha-lipoic acid (ALA), three clonazepam, three psychotherapy, and two capsaicin, which all showed modest evidence of potentially decreasing pain/burning. Gabapentin was seen in one study to work alone and synergistically with ALA. Other treatments included vitamins, benzydamine hydrochloride, bupivacaine, Catuama, olive oil, trazodone, urea, and Hypericum perforatum. Of these other treatments, Catuama and bupivacaine were the only ones with significant positive results in symptom improvement. ALA, topical clonazepam, gabapentin, and psychotherapy may provide modest relief of pain in BMS. Gabapentin may also boost the effect of ALA. Capsaicin is limited by its side effects. Catuama showed potential for benefit. Future studies with standardized methodology and outcomes containing more patients are needed.

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.

Natural products for the management of xerostomia: a randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled clinical trial

AIM

The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical performance of lycopene-enriched virgin olive oil in spray form used to treat patients with drug-induced xerostomia, comparing this with a placebo spray.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This double-blind, randomized clinical trial included elderly subjects with drug-induced xerostomia (n = 60). Resting salivary flow was measured using the draining technique. The Xerostomia Inventory (XI) was used to assess symptoms and the Oral Health Impact Profile 14 (OHIP-14) to assess patient quality of life. Evaluations were made before and after 12 weeks of product/placebo application.

RESULTS

Sixty patients took part in the study. Symptoms improved among the treatment group (n = 30) after 12 weeks in the following XI domains: 'Rate the difficulty you experience in speaking because of dryness' (P = 0.03); 'Rate how much saliva is in your mouth' (P = 0.03); and 'Rate the dryness of your lips' (P = 0.04). The placebo group (n = 30) underwent improvements in: 'Rate how much saliva is in your mouth' (P = 0.02) and 'Rate the dryness of your mouth' (P = 0.01). A significant improvement (P = 0.001) in oral-related quality of life (OHIP-14) was identified in the treatment group, while no significant differences were observed in the placebo group (P > 0.05).

CONCLUSION

The topical application of lycopene-enriched virgin olive oil and its placebo counterpart improved xerostomia-related symptoms significantly (but not salivary flow rate) in patients with drug-induced xerostomia.

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.

Effect of oil pulling in promoting oro dental hygiene: A systematic review of randomized clinical trials

AIM

To critically appraise and evaluate the evidence from randomized clinical trials (RCTs) examining the effectiveness of oil pulling on oro dental hygiene.

METHODS

We conducted electronic searches in Medline, Embase, Amed, The Cochrane Library and Cinahl databases from inception to February 2015, and assessed reporting quality using the Cochrane risk of bias criteria. We included RCTs that compared oil pulling using conventional cooking oils with a control intervention. Our primary outcomes were measures of oro dental hygiene using validated scales.

RESULTS

Electronic searches yielded 26 eligible studies, of which five RCTs comprising a total of 160 participants were included. The studies varied in reporting quality, lasted between 10 and 45 days, and compared oil pulling with chlorhexidine, placebo or routine dental hygiene practice. Three studies reported no significant differences in post intervention plaque index scores between oil pulling and control groups (Chlorhexidine mouthwash +/- Placebo): p=0.28, 0.94, and 0.38, respectively. Two studies reported no significant difference in post-intervention modified gingival index score between oil pulling and Chlorhexidine mouthwash groups (p=0.32 and 0.64).

CONCLUSION

The limited evidence to date from clinical trials suggests that oil pulling may have beneficial effects on oro dental hygiene as seen for the short period of time investigated. Given that this is a potentially cost-effective intervention, this practice might be of particular benefit. Future clinical trials should be more rigorous and better reported.