The effects of parafunctional habit control and topical lubricant on discomforts associated with burning mouth syndrome (BMS)

Amitriptyline effectiveness in burning mouth syndrome: An in-depth case series analysis

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness of amitriptyline (AMT), and to identify the determinants of the treatment's effectiveness in patients diagnosed with burning mouth syndrome (BMS).

BACKGROUND

Treatment of BMS is challenging and no established treatment protocol is available. AMT may be an important treatment option, cout not all patients benefit from this drug. Studies assessing factors related to treatment response are valuable in improving decision-making.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This case series study examined the medical records of all patients diagnosed with BMS at an oral medicine unit in a university hospital from 2008 to 2022. The patients were divided into responders to AMT and non-responders to AMT. Data on demographic information, comorbidities, medications, types of symptoms and oral subsites affected were collected. Descriptive and bivariate analyses were conducted to assess the association between the independent variables and the outcome, using the Chi-squared test (P < .05).

RESULTS

Three hundred and fourty-nine patients reported a burning mouth sensation, 50 of them (14.3%) being diagnosed with primary BMS. Of these, 35 were treated with AMT, and 26 (74.2%) responded significantly to AMT. All males responded to AMT, whereas only 67.9% of females responded. The mean dose of AMT among responders was 29.8 ± 12.3 mg, with most patients achieving a response with 25 mg (61.5% of patients), followed by 50 mg (23%). The concomitant use of an anticonvulsant resulted in non-response.

CONCLUSIONS

AMT may be effective in BMS management for most patients.

Prediction of treatment outcome in burning mouth syndrome patients using machine learning based on clinical data

The purpose of this study is to apply a machine learning approach to predict whether patients with burning mouth syndrome (BMS) respond to the initial approach and clonazepam therapy based on clinical data. Among the patients with the primary type of BMS who visited the clinic from 2006 to 2015, those treated with the initial approach of detailed explanation regarding home care instruction and use of oral topical lubricants, or who were prescribed clonazepam for a minimum of 1 month were included in this study. The clinical data and treatment outcomes were collected from medical records. Extreme Gradient-Boosted Decision Trees was used for machine learning algorithms to construct prediction models. Accuracy of the prediction models was evaluated and feature importance calculated. The accuracy of the prediction models for the initial approach and clonazepam therapy was 67.6% and 67.4%, respectively. Aggravating factors and psychological distress were important features in the prediction model for the initial approach, and intensity of symptoms before administration was the important feature in the prediction model for clonazepam therapy. In conclusion, the analysis of treatment outcomes in patients with BMS using a machine learning approach showed meaningful results of clinical applicability.

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.

Assessing and treating primary headaches and cranio-facial pain in patients undergoing rehabilitation for neurological diseases

BACKGROUND

Pain is a very common condition in patient undergoing rehabilitation for neurological disease; however the presence of primary headaches and other cranio-facial pains, particularly when they are actually or apparently independent from the disability for which patient is undergoing rehabilitation, is often neglected. Diagnostic and therapeutic international and national guidelines, as well as tools for the subjective measure of head pain are available and should also be applied in the neurorehabilitation setting. This calls for searching the presence of head pain, independently from the rehabilitation needs, since pain, either episodic or chronic, interferes with patient performance by affecting physical and emotional status. Pain may also interfere with sleep and therefore hamper recovery.

METHODS

In our role of task force of the Italian Consensus Conference on Pain in Neurorehabilitation (ICCPN), we have elaborated specific recommendations for diagnosing and treating head pains in patients undergoing rehabilitation for neurological diseases.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSION

In this narrative review, we describe the available literature that has been evaluated in order to define the recommendations and outline the needs of epidemiological studies concerning headache and other cranio-facial pain in neurorehabilitation.

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.

The role of xerostomia in burning mouth syndrome: a case-control study

Objective : To assess the efficacy of anti-xerostomic topical medication (urea 10%) in patients with burning mouth syndrome (BMS). Method : Thirty-eight subjects diagnosed with BMS according to the International Association for the Study of Pain guidelines were randomized to either placebo (5% sodium carboxymethylcellulose, 0.15% methyl paraben, and 10% glycerol in distilled water qsp 100 g) or treatment (urea 10%) to be applied to the oral cavity 3-4 times per day for 3 months. The patients were evaluated before and after treatment with the following instruments: the EDOF-HC protocol (Orofacial Pain Clinic – Hospital das Clínicas), a xerostomia questionnaire, and quantitative sensory testing. Results : There were no differences in salivary flow or gustative, olfactory, or sensory thresholds (P>0.05). Fifteen (60%) patients reported improvement with the treatments (P=0.336). Conclusion : In conclusion, there were no differences between groups, and both exhibited an association between reported improvement and salivation.

Topical medications as treatment of neuropathic orofacial pain

Understanding mechanisms of neuropathic orofacial pain, targets of treatment, and basic pharmacology and working with informed compounding pharmacists may result in significant benefit for patients. The clinical significance of topical medications is improvement of quality of life for patients by providing a unique medication delivery system for neuropathic orofacial pain and other dental and extraoral conditions. The use of this route of administration has decreased or minimized side effects compared with other methods and is especially useful in medically compromised and elderly patients. These innovations, supported and improved by ongoing research, will augment the armamentarium of the clinician treating orofacial pain disorders.

Salivary cortisol, 17β-estradiol, progesterone, dehydroepiandrosterone, and α-amylase in patients with burning mouth syndrome

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to investigate salivary markers related with burning mouth syndrome (BMS).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Thirty female patients with BMS and twenty female control subjects were included. Unstimulated (UWS) and stimulated whole saliva samples (SWS) were collected, and their flow rates were determined. Salivary levels of cortisol, 17β-estradiol, progesterone, dehydroepiandrosterone (DHEA), and enzymatic activity of α-amylase were determined. Salivary transferrin level was measured to determine the level of blood contamination in saliva samples.

RESULTS

  The levels of all analytes in UWS were significantly correlated with those of SWS. The levels of 17β-estradiol, progesterone, and DHEA in UWS were significantly correlated with age. Age-matched comparisons revealed that the patient group had significantly higher levels of cortisol in UWS and of 17β-estradiol in SWS. When the patients were divided into older (≥60years) and younger (<60years) groups, the older group showed a significantly lower level of progesterone in UWS. There were no significant relationships between treatment efficacy and levels of salivary analytes.

CONCLUSIONS

In conclusion, patients with BMS showed significantly higher levels of cortisol in UWS and of 17β-estradiol in SWS compared with controls.