A clinical comparative trial of saliva substitutes in radiation-induced salivary gland hypofunction

Randomized Double-Blind Placebo-Controlled Study of Salivary Substitute with Enzymatic System for Xerostomia in Patients Irradiated in Head and Neck Region

This study aims to compare whether the use of a salivary substitute including an enzymatic system clinically reduces the intensity of xerostomia, as well as exploring the impact that this has on the quality of life, in patients who had received radiotherapy in the head and neck (HNC) region. Forty patients who had completed radiotherapy treatment within 6 months to 1 year previously were allocated into an Enzymatic Spray group (n = 21) or a Placebo arm (n = 19). It should be noted that two patients in the Placebo arm declined to participate during phase 2 of the study. All patients were randomized and used both products three times a day for 30 days. For analysis, xerostomia grade, unstimulated (UWS) and stimulated (SWS) salivary flow rate, and quality of life through the University of Washington Quality of Life Questionnaire validated in Portuguese (UW-QoL) were assessed in two phases: Phase 1 (before the use of the products) and Phase 2 (after 30 days of using the products). All clinical data were collected from medical records. Analyzing the salivary substitute with the enzymatic system, an improvement in xerostomia complaints was observed 30 days after using the product; however, this difference was not statistically significant (p > 0.05). Regarding quality of life, no significant differences were observed in relation to the UW-QoL and saliva domain between the groups in the two phases of the study (p > 0.05). The salivary substitute with the enzymatic system may be effective in reducing radio-induced xerostomia symptoms; however, further research is necessary to evaluate the efficacy of this salivary substitute on oral health.

Sodium-hyaluronate mouthwash on radiotherapy-induced xerostomia: a randomised clinical trial

INTRODUCTION

Radiotherapy-induced xerostomia (RIX) is one of the most common adverse effects of radiotherapy (RT) in head and neck cancer patients (HNC) and a major determinant of survivors' quality of life. The primary objective was to evaluate the reduction of patients' xerostomia symptoms after the utilisation of a sodium-hyaluronate mouthwash compared to a placebo solution. The secondary objectives were to evaluate the improvement of quality of life and to evaluate the patients' satisfaction.

METHODS

The protocol was approved by the ethical committee (Ref. 50,053/19) and registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (ID: NCT05103124). The study was a double-blind randomised clinical trial (RCT) with a crossover design and was conducted at the Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli, Rome.

RESULTS

Thirty-two patients completed the study protocol. Lower values of the modified Xerostomia Questionnaire (XQ) were retrieved when comparing the baseline scores to the ones after the treatment, when compared with placebo (Mann-Whitney U test = 0.01); higher values of patients' satisfaction (Likert scale) and modified XQ were retrieved for the sodium-hyaluronate mouthwash (Mann-Whitney U test = 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

This RCT highlights the advantages of treating RIX with the sodium-hyaluronate mouthwash since it seems to be clinically effective in reducing its symptoms, without any reported adverse events.

CLINICALTRIALS

gov: NCT05103124 in 17/10/2021.

Salivary Gland Hypofunction and/or Xerostomia Induced by Nonsurgical Cancer Therapies: ISOO/MASCC/ASCO Guideline

PURPOSE

To provide evidence-based recommendations for prevention and management of salivary gland hypofunction and xerostomia induced by nonsurgical cancer therapies.

METHODS

Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer/International Society of Oral Oncology (MASCC/ISOO) and ASCO convened a multidisciplinary Expert Panel to evaluate the evidence and formulate recommendations. PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library were searched for randomized controlled trials published between January 2009 and June 2020. The guideline also incorporated two previous systematic reviews conducted by MASCC/ISOO, which included studies published from 1990 through 2008.

RESULTS

A total of 58 publications were identified: 46 addressed preventive interventions and 12 addressed therapeutic interventions. A majority of the evidence focused on the setting of radiation therapy for head and neck cancer. For the prevention of salivary gland hypofunction and/or xerostomia in patients with head and neck cancer, there is high-quality evidence for tissue-sparing radiation modalities. Evidence is weaker or insufficient for other interventions. For the management of salivary gland hypofunction and/or xerostomia, intermediate-quality evidence supports the use of topical mucosal lubricants, saliva substitutes, and agents that stimulate the salivary reflex.

RECOMMENDATIONS

For patients who receive radiation therapy for head and neck cancer, tissue-sparing radiation modalities should be used when possible to reduce the risk of salivary gland hypofunction and xerostomia. Other risk-reducing interventions that may be offered during radiation therapy for head and neck cancer include bethanechol and acupuncture. For patients who develop salivary gland hypofunction and/or xerostomia, interventions include topical mucosal lubricants, saliva substitutes, and sugar-free lozenges or chewing gum. For patients with head and neck cancer, oral pilocarpine and oral cevimeline, acupuncture, or transcutaneous electrostimulation may be offered after radiation therapy.Additional information can be found at www.asco.org/supportive-care-guidelines.

Oil pulling to relieve medication-induced xerostomia: A randomized, single-blind, crossover trial

OBJECTIVES

To determine the subjective effectiveness of oilpulling on medication-induced xerostomia with regard to symptom relief, quality of life, taste, mucosal moisture and oral parameters.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In a randomized, single-blind, crossover trial in participants with medication-induced xerostomia (n = 26; mean age 64.71 (standard deviation (SD) 15.60) years), we investigated oilpulling efficacy (sunflower oil) versus mineral water after one-week use. Xerostomic burden (visual analogue scale, VAS), symptom relief and oral examinations (gingivitis index, plaque index, whole stimulated and unstimulated salivation rates) were investigated at baseline and the end of the follow-up.

RESULTS

Oilpulling reduced the xerostomic burden (baseline value 6.46 (SD 1.80), decreasing to 4.93 (SD 2.97)) (p = .003), without difference between oil versus water (p = .067). Baseline values for water were 6.08 (SD 2.17) decreasing to 5.72 (SD 2.17) (p = .124). Compared to water, oil made swallowing easier (p = .031), caused a pleasant mouthfeel (p = .031) and caused less waking up at night (p = .031). Effectiveness (p = .002) and duration (p = .007) of symptom relief showed differences between products in favour of oil.

CONCLUSIONS

Oil pulling alleviated the overall xerostomic burden. In the comparison between oil and water, no difference regarding symptom relief could be shown. Patients should be informed of possibilities and limitations of oilpulling as inexpensive and easy-to-obtain alternative to commercially available products for short-term symptom relief.

Salivary Gland Hypofunction and Xerostomia in Head and Neck Radiation Patients

BACKGROUND

The most manifest long-term consequences of radiation therapy in the head and neck cancer patient are salivary gland hypofunction and a sensation of oral dryness (xerostomia).

METHODS

This critical review addresses the consequences of radiation injury to salivary gland tissue, the clinical management of salivary gland hypofunction and xerostomia, and current and potential strategies to prevent or reduce radiation injury to salivary gland tissue or restore the function of radiation-injured salivary gland tissue.

RESULTS

Salivary gland hypofunction and xerostomia have severe implications for oral functioning, maintenance of oral and general health, and quality of life. Significant progress has been made to spare salivary gland function chiefly due to advances in radiation techniques. Other strategies have also been developed, e.g., radioprotectors, identification and preservation/expansion of salivary stem cells by stimulation with cholinergic muscarinic agonists, and application of new lubricating or stimulatory agents, surgical transfer of submandibular glands, and acupuncture.

CONCLUSION

Many advances to manage salivary gland hypofunction and xerostomia induced by radiation therapy still only offer partial protection since they are often of short duration, lack the protective effects of saliva, or potentially have significant adverse effects. Intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT), and its next step, proton therapy, have the greatest potential as a management strategy for permanently preserving salivary gland function in head and neck cancer patients.Presently, gene transfer to supplement fluid formation and stem cell transfer to increase the regenerative potential in radiation-damaged salivary glands are promising approaches for regaining function and/or regeneration of radiation-damaged salivary gland tissue.

Efficacy of a newly developed mouth gel for xerostomia relief-A randomized double-blind trial

OBJECTIVES

To determine the efficacy of a new symptom-relieving mouth gel vs. a widely used control gel on xerostomic burden.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This randomized, double-blind, crossover trial investigated the efficacy of the test gel (Dr. Wolff Gel) vs. control (Biotene) in participants with xerostomia (n = 32; mean age 60 years). Oral examinations were taken at baseline, and xerostomic visual analogue scales (xVAS), after-use questionnaires and willingness to pay were investigated before and after use.

RESULTS

Neither gel reduced xerostomic burden (xVAS) after 7-day application. There was some preference for the test gel regarding taste and healthy gum feeling. After 1-time application, there were differences favouring the test gel for symptom-relieving effects between test gel and water (p < 0.001), mucosal adhesion (p < 0.001) and taste persistence (p < 0.001). Overall symptomatic relief with the test gel lasted around 2 hr.

CONCLUSIONS

No mouth gel alleviated the overall xerostomic burden. Nevertheless, the test gel led to short-term perceived symptomatic relief and improved patient-centred outcomes as taste and perceived gum health. The gel will probably mainly be effective at moments that patients mostly suffer from xerostomia. Selection of a product will be based on perceived subjective differences and their value in the context of the overall xerostomic burden.

Efficacy of saliva substitutes and stimulants in the treatment of dry mouth

AIMS

To evaluate the efficacy of saliva substitutes and stimulants compared to placebo in improving findings of dry mouth not caused by Sjӧgren's.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Four databases were searched (PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and EMBASE) through March 2018. Only randomized controlled trials (RCT) using placebo interventions with dry mouth patients were included. Outcomes included salivary flow and self-reported patient improvement. The Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias was used. A total of 348 references were reviewed, resulting in 7 RCTs with 257 dry mouth patients with 5 studies at high risk of bias, 1 unclear and 1 low risk being included. Topical spray of 1% malic acid increased unstimulated (Difference in Means [DM] = 0.096, 95% CI = 0.092-0.100; P < 0.001) and stimulated (DM = 0.203, 95% CI = 0.106-0.300; P < 0.001) salivary flow in 2 studies. Patients using 1% malic acid topical spray were 5.4 times more likely to report improvement compared to placebo (95% CI = 2.634-11.091; P < 0.001) in 2 studies. No significant improvements were found with other products when compared to placebo.

CONCLUSION

Use of 1% malic acid topical spray seems to improve dry mouth compared to placebo. Quality of the evidence was low due to risk of bias and imprecision.

Efficacy of GUM® Hydral versus Biotène® Oralbalance mouthwashes plus gels on symptoms of medication-induced xerostomia: a randomized, double-blind, crossover study

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this study is to determine the efficacy of GUM® Hydral versus Biotène® Oralbalance (both a mouthwash plus gel) on the subjective burden and clinical symptoms of patients with medication-induced xerostomia.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Subjects (N = 40) with medication-induced xerostomia (minimum 4/10 mm visual analog scale [VAS]) were randomized to treatment with GUM Hydral or Biotène Oralbalance mouthwash, both with gel, for 28 days. Subjects then entered a 21-day wash-out period, before crossing over to the other treatment for 28 days. Outcomes measured included the VAS, German Oral Health Impact Profile (OHIPG)-14, Xerostomia Questionnaire (XQ), after-use questionnaire, and clinical parameters.

RESULTS

Both GUM Hydral and Biotène Oralbalance significantly (p < 0.05) reduced VAS, OHIPG-14 total score and single items, and XQ Part 1 (oral dryness, oral pain, taste loss) and Part 2 items. GUM Hydral also significantly reduced the XQ Part 1 dysphagia score, while Biotène Oralbalance significantly reduced the halitosis organoleptic score and plaque index. Significant increases in saliva secretion did not reach clinical relevance. No significant between-group differences were observed, apart from OHIPG-14 items "trouble pronouncing words" and "uncertainty" in favor of GUM Hydral. No adverse effects were reported.

CONCLUSIONS

Both products effectively improve oral health and xerostomia-related quality of life. However, they cannot completely substitute the continuous in-mouth secretion of saliva, and symptomatic relief is temporary. Product selection will be based on personal preference.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Both products diminish xerostomic burden and should be part of the management strategy. Affected patients should be informed of these treatments, since no adverse effects were reported.

Radiation-Induced Xerostomia

Xerostomia is a common complication following radiotherapy for head and neck cancers. This has long-term implications on the quality of life of these patients. The better understanding of salivary function and the interaction of radiotherapy dose-volume and fractionation with salivary function has allowed us to intervene with various modalities to prevent or treat this common complication. Thus we present a review of published literature describing the factors affecting xerostomia, its prevention and treatment.

How to cite this article

Baijal G, Kar R, Agarwal JP. Radiation-Induced Xerostomia. Int J Head Neck Surg 2012;3(2): 82-86.

Interventions for the management of dry mouth: topical therapies

BACKGROUND

Xerostomia (the feeling of dry mouth) is a common symptom especially in older adults. Causes of dry mouth include medications, autoimmune disease (Sjögren's Syndrome), radiotherapy or chemotherapy for cancer, hormone disorders and infections.

OBJECTIVES

To determine which topical treatments for dry mouth are effective in reducing this symptom.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following electronic databases: the Cochrane Oral Health Group Trials Register (28 October 2011), The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library, Issue 4 2011), MEDLINE via OVID (1950 to 28 October 2011), EMBASE via OVID (1980 to 28 October 2011), CINAHL via EBSCO (1980 to 28 October 2011), AMED via OVID (1985 to 28 October 2011), CANCERLIT via PubMed (1950 to 28 October 2011).

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials of topical interventions such as lozenges, sprays, mouthrinses, gels, oils, chewing gum or toothpastes for the treatment of dry mouth symptom. We classified interventions into two broad categories, saliva stimulants and saliva substitutes, and these were compared with either placebo or another intervention. We included both parallel group and crossover trials.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two or more review authors independently carried out data extraction and assessed risk of bias. Trial authors were contacted for additional information as required.

MAIN RESULTS

Thirty-six randomised controlled trials involving 1597 participants met the inclusion criteria. Two trials compared saliva stimulants to placebo, nine trials compared saliva substitutes to placebo, five trials compared saliva stimulants directly with saliva substitutes, 18 trials directly compared two or more saliva substitutes, and two trials directly compared two or more saliva stimulants. Only one trial was at low risk of bias and 17 were at high risk of bias. Due to the range of interventions, comparisons and outcome measures in the trials, meta-analysis was possible for only a few comparisons. Oxygenated glycerol triester (OGT) saliva substitute spray shows evidence of effectiveness compared to an electrolyte spray (standardised mean difference (SMD) 0.77, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.38 to 1.15) which corresponds to approximately a mean difference of 2 points on a 10-point visual analogue scale (VAS) for mouth dryness. Both integrated mouthcare systems (toothpaste + gel + mouthwash) and oral reservoir devices show promising results but there is insufficient evidence at present to recommend their use. Although chewing gum is associated with increased saliva production in the majority of those with residual capacity, there is no evidence that gum is more or less effective than saliva substitutes.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is no strong evidence from this review that any topical therapy is effective for relieving the symptom of dry mouth. OGT spray is more effective than an aqueous electrolyte spray (SMD 0.77, 95% CI 0.38 to 1.15) which is approximately equivalent to a mean difference of 2 points on a 10-point VAS scale for mouth dryness. Chewing gums appear to increase saliva production in those with residual secretory capacity and may be preferred by patients, but there is no evidence that gum is better or worse than saliva substitutes. Integrated mouthcare systems and oral reservoir devices may be helpful but further research is required to confirm this. Well designed, adequately powered randomised controlled trials of topical interventions for dry mouth, which are designed and reported according to CONSORT guidelines, are required to provide evidence to guide clinical care. For many people the symptom of dry mouth is a chronic problem and trials should evaluate whether treatments are palatable, effective in reducing xerostomia, as well as the long-term effects of treatments on quality of life of those with chronic dry mouth symptoms.

Design of a randomized controlled double-blind crossover clinical trial to assess the effects of saliva substitutes on bovine enamel and dentin in situ

Background

Hyposalivation is caused by various syndromes, diabetes, drugs, inflammation, infection, or radiotherapy of the salivary glands. Patients with hyposalivation often show an increased caries incidence. Moreover, hyposalivation is frequently accompanied by oral discomfort and impaired oral functions, and saliva substitutes are widely used to alleviate oral symptoms. However, preference of saliva substitutes due to taste, handling, and relief of oral symptoms has been discussed controversially. Some of the marketed products have shown demineralizing effects on dental hard tissues in vitro. This demineralizing potential is attributed to the undersaturation with respect to calcium phosphates. Therefore, it is important to modify the mineralizing potential of saliva substitutes to prevent carious lesions. Thus, the aim of the present study was to evaluate the effects of a possible remineralizing saliva substitute (SN; modified Saliva natura) compared to a demineralizing one (G; Glandosane) on mineral parameters of sound bovine dentin and enamel as well as on artificially demineralized enamel specimens in situ. Moreover, oral well-being after use of each saliva substitute was recorded.

Methods/Design

Using a randomized, double-blind, crossover, phase II/III in situ trial, volunteers with hyposalivation utilize removable dentures containing bovine specimens during the experimental period. The volunteers are divided into two groups, and are required to apply both saliva substitutes for seven weeks each. After both test periods, differences in mineral loss and lesion depth between values before and after exposure are evaluated based on microradiographs. The oral well-being of the volunteers before and after therapy is determined using questionnaires. With respect to the microradiographic analysis, equal mineral losses and lesion depths of enamel and dentin specimens during treatment with SN and G, and no differences in patients' experienced oral comfort after SN compared to G usage are expected (H₀).

Discussion

Up to now, 14 patients have been included in the study, and no reasons for early termination of the trial have been identified. The design seems suitable for determining the effects of saliva substitutes on dental hard tissues in situ, and should provide detailed information on the oral well-being after use of different saliva substitutes in patients with hyposalivation.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov ID. NCT01165970

A systematic review of salivary gland hypofunction and xerostomia induced by cancer therapies: management strategies and economic impact

PURPOSE

This systematic review aimed to assess the literature for management strategies and economic impact of salivary gland hypofunction and xerostomia induced by cancer therapies and to determine the quality of evidence-based management recommendations.

METHODS

The electronic databases of MEDLINE/PubMed and EMBASE were searched for articles published in English since the 1989 NIH Development Consensus Conference on the Oral Complications of Cancer Therapies until 2008 inclusive. For each article, two independent reviewers extracted information regarding study design, study population, interventions, outcome measures, results, and conclusions.

RESULTS

Seventy-two interventional studies met the inclusion criteria. In addition, 49 intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) studies were included as a management strategy aiming for less salivary gland damage. Management guideline recommendations were drawn up for IMRT, amifostine, muscarinic agonist stimulation, oral mucosal lubricants, acupuncture, and submandibular gland transfer.

CONCLUSIONS

There is evidence that salivary gland hypofunction and xerostomia induced by cancer therapies can be prevented or symptoms be minimized to some degree, depending on the type of cancer treatment. Management guideline recommendations are provided for IMRT, amifostine, muscarinic agonist stimulation, oral mucosal lubricants, acupuncture, and submandibular gland transfer. Fields of sparse literature identified included effects of gustatory and masticatory stimulation, specific oral mucosal lubricant formulas, submandibular gland transfer, acupuncture, hyperbaric oxygen treatment, management strategies in pediatric cancer populations, and the economic consequences of salivary gland hypofunction and xerostomia.

Saliva substitutes for the treatment of radiation-induced xerostomia--a review

GOAL

The aim of this review is to summarize the in vitro and in vivo evidence on the performance of contemporary saliva substitutes in the treatment of xerostomia and hyposalivation caused by radiation therapy for head and neck malignancies.

METHODS

A literature search was conducted during July to September 2008 in PubMed, using the query terms "saliva substitute", "saliva substitute and xerostomia", "artificial saliva", and "artificial saliva and xerostomia"; for clinical studies, only studies in patients suffering from radiation-induced xerostomia have been included in the review.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSION

Fifty-two studies met the inclusion criteria and were allotted either to the in vitro topics "viscosity", "lubrication", "wetting properties", "antimicrobial effects", and "enamel and dentin de- and remineralization", or to the in vivo topics "clinical acceptance" or "influence on plaque formation and oral mucosa and microflora". The findings suggest that there are significant differences in the performance of various saliva substitutes concerning the review parameters, yet indicate that further in vitro and in vivo studies on the properties of saliva substitutes are necessary.

Safety and effectiveness of topical dry mouth products containing olive oil, betaine, and xylitol in reducing xerostomia for polypharmacy-induced dry mouth

Polypharmacy is a common cause of salivary hypofunction, producing symptoms of dry mouth or xerostomia, especially among older populations. As the number of older people continues to increase, polypharmacy-induced salivary hypofunction is becoming an increasing problem. Many over-the-counter products are available for relieving symptoms of dry mouth, but few have been tested in controlled clinical investigations. The purpose of this investigation was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of a group of topical dry mouth products (toothpaste, mouth rinse, mouth spray and gel) containing olive oil, betaine and xylitol. Forty adults were entered into this single-blinded, open-label, cross-over clinical study and 39 completed all the visits. Subjects were randomly assigned at baseline to using the novel topical dry mouth products daily for 1 week, or to maintain their normal dry mouth routine care. After 1 week, they were crossed over to the other dry mouth regimen. The results demonstrated that the use of the novel topical dry mouth products increased significantly unstimulated whole salivary flow rates, reduced complaints of xerostomia and improved xerostomia-associated quality of life. No clinically significant adverse events were observed. These data suggest that the daily use of topical dry mouth products containing olive oil, betaine and xylitol is safe and effective in relieving symptoms of dry mouth in a population with polypharmacy-induced xerostomia.

Open-label, long-term safety study of cevimeline in the treatment of postirradiation xerostomia

PURPOSE

To assess the safety of long-term cevimeline treatment of radiation-induced xerostomia in patients with head-and-neck cancer; and to assess the efficacy of cevimeline in these patients.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

A total of 255 adults with head-and-neck cancer who had received more than 40 Gy of radiation 4 months or more before entry and had clinically significant salivary gland dysfunction received cevimeline hydrochloride 45 mg t.i.d. orally for 52 weeks. Adverse events (AEs), their severity, and their relationship to the study medication were assessed by each investigator. The efficacy assessment was based on subjects' global evaluation of oral dryness on a scale of 0 (none) to 3 (severe).

RESULTS

Overall, 175 subjects (68.6%) experienced expected treatment-related AEs, most mild to moderate. The most frequent was increased sweating (47.5%), followed by dyspepsia (9.4%), nausea (8.2%), and diarrhea (6.3%). Fifteen subjects (5.9%) experienced Grade 3 treatment-related AEs, of which the most frequent was increased sweating. Eighteen subjects (7.1%) reported at least one serious AE, and 45 subjects (17.6%) discontinued study medication because of an AE. The global efficacy evaluation at the last study visit showed that cevimeline improved dry mouth in most subjects (59.2%). Significant improvement was seen at each study visit in the mean change from baseline of the numeric global evaluation score (p < 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

Cevimeline 45 mg t.i.d. was generally well tolerated over a period of 52 weeks in subjects with xerostomia secondary to radiotherapy for cancer in the head-and-neck region.

Management of salivary hypofunction during and after radiotherapy

Salivary hypofunction, the most common complication of high-dose radiation therapy (RT) to the head and neck, has a significant impact on quality of life, and requires careful planning of long-term dental and oral care. This report documents the results and conclusions of an evidence-based literature review on multidisciplinary team management of salivary hypofunction during and after RT. An update is provided on the pathophysiology of salivary hypofunction during and after RT, and recommendations for clinical management. The paper presents aspects managed by dental professionals (use of cholinergic agonists and other saliva stimulants, prevention of hyposalivation-induced rampant caries, and use of saliva substitutes), as well as the role of the radiation oncologist in minimizing salivary gland damage (parotid-sparing RT; cytoprotectants). This summary includes basic science, translational and clinical research topics with respect to radiation-induced salivary hypofunction, and provides an evidence-based management algorithm.

Electrostimulating device in the management of xerostomia

INTRODUCTION

The present study was undertaken to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of a recently developed electrostimulating device mounted on an individualized intra-oral removable appliance.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The device, containing electrodes, a wetness sensor, an electronic circuit and a power source, was tested on patients with xerostomia in a crossover, randomized, sham-controlled, double-blinded, multicenter study. Electrical stimulation and also sham were delivered during 10 min to the oral mucosa, in the mandibular third molar region. Oral dryness was measured by the sensor. As the primary outcome, sensor dryness and xerostomia symptom changes as a result of device wearing were assessed, and compared between active and sham modes. In addition, side-effects were recorded.

RESULTS

Electrostimulation resulted in a significant decrease in sensor dryness, leading to a beneficial effect on patients' subjective condition. No significant side-effects were observed.

Impact of wearing an intra-oral lubricating device on oral health in dry mouth patients

OBJECTIVE

To establish whether an intra-oral lubricating device for dry mouth alters the oral environment.

DESIGN

A single-blind randomized cross-over study.

METHOD

Twenty-nine dentate subjects from the Sjogren's syndrome clinic attended on five occasions at 4-week intervals. They were randomized, having the device fitted on either the second or the fourth visit for the experimental period, whilst using their preferred method of lubrication throughout the rest of the study. The preferred methods of lubrication were either water (group 1, n = 10) or saliva substitute (group 2, n = 9) or sugar-free chewing gum (group 3, n = 10). At each visit microbiological, unstimulated and stimulated saliva samples were collected. Dry mouth score, speech test and periodontal indices were recorded.

RESULTS

The water lubrication group (1) had a resting salivary flow greater than lubrication groups (2 and 3) by post-ANOVA contrasts (P < 0.001). The postdevice data also demonstrated a salivary flow greater than lubrication group (3) by post-ANOVA contrasts (P < 0.05). The epithelial cell count using the Spearman correlation was high, possibly reflecting increased viscosity of the saliva (P = 0.044). The speech test indicated that the experimental subjects had difficulty in speaking (P = 0.001). This was slightly easier postdevice wear. Streptococcus mutans (P = 0.009) and Lactobacillus (P = 0.058) increased in the saliva after wearing the device. Salivary flow rate, Candida albicans, oral dryness, speaking and periodontal indices were unchanged.

CONCLUSIONS

The oral environment was altered by wearing a lubricating device with an increase in the numbers of Strep. mutans and Lactobacillus. Clinical dryness and speech test correlated with the mean whole salivary flow suggesting a screening method for xerostomia.

A double-blind, crossover study of Biotene Oralbalance and BioXtra systems as salivary substitutes in patients with post-radiotherapy xerostomia

This study assessed the efficacy of the Bioxtra (BX) and Biotène Oralbalance (OB) systems in the treatment of post-radiotherapy xerostomia. In a double-blind, crossover study, 20 patients with post-radiotherapy xerostomia were randomly allocated to receive either OB then BX, or vice versa, each product for 2 weeks, with a 1 week wash-out period in between. Subject-based dry mouth scores derived from 100-mm visual analogue scales were recorded at days 0 and 14 of each 2-week period, together with subjective perception of changes in dry mouth symptoms. Both treatments were effective, resulting in reduction of visual analogue scale scores from day 0-14. Between-groups comparisons identified that BX achieved significantly better improvements compared with OB for the perception of dry mouth and improvements in speech and was also rated as more pleasant to use than OB (P < 0.05). In conclusion, both treatments were effective in alleviating the symptoms of post-radiotherapy xerostomia, although BX achieved superiority in some of the outcomes assessed compared with OB.

Radiotherapy-induced salivary dysfunction

Dry mouth (xerostomia) is one of the most common complaints following radiation therapy (RT) for head and neck cancers. Notably, RT causes irreparable damage to salivary glands that increases the risk for severe and long-term oral and pharyngeal disorders. Several strategies in the treatment of head and neck cancers have been developed to prevent RT-induced salivary dysfunction while providing definitive oncologic therapy. These include salivary-sparing RT; cytoprotectants (such as amifostine); combination therapy of high-dose-rate intraoperative RT, external beam RT, plus a cytoprotectant; salivary gland surgical transfer; and gene therapy. Future research that incorporates biologic, pharmacologic, and technologic advancements that optimize therapeutic ratios and minimizes adverse oral sequelae is warranted.

An update of the etiology and management of xerostomia

Salivary gland disease gives rise to salivary gland enlargement, pain, and prolonged xerostomia (dry mouth). Xerostomia is the most common long-standing problem for the majority of affected patients. There are many causes of dry mouth, with long-standing xerostomia being a particular problem in Sjögren's syndrome and after radiation to the head and neck region. Xerostomia is usually managed with saliva substitutes, but a large number of potential systemic therapies of long-standing xerostomia now exist. Some-particularly immunosuppressants-are of fundamental interest for the potential reduction of gland damage in Sjögren's syndrome but as yet are of limited clinical usefulness. Others, particularly pilocarpine and cevimeline, are, or have the potential to be, clinically useful in stimulating salivation by virtue of their action on cholinergic receptors.

Treatment of xerostomia: a systematic review of therapeutic trials

The results of the present systematic review of randomized controlled trials published in peer-reviewed journals demonstrate the presence of a wide variety of biases and the weakness of the existing literature of xerostomia treatment. The report of statistically significant efficacy on an outcome measure is only meaningful in the setting of a well-controlled, appropriately designed clinical trial. This points to the importance of evaluating the quality of the clinical trial closely when deciding if study results are applicable to a specific patient population. Future studies in the management of xerostomia will require an increased effort on the part of investigators to eliminate easily recognized flaws during the planning stages of a clinical trial. Minimizing bias in clinical studies will allow for easier interpretation and comparisons of different studies. Better clinical trial design is vital to provide maximal confidence in the efficacy of xerostomia interventions.

Patients with head and neck cancer cured by radiation therapy: a survey of the dry mouth syndrome in long-term survivors

BACKGROUND

Xerostomia can have a significant impact on the quality of life of patients treated by radiation therapy (RT) for cancer in the head and neck. The first aim of the study was to evaluate the degree of xerostomia in 39 long-term survivors treated between 1965-1995 by conventional two-dimensional radiation therapy and currently without evidence of disease. The second aim was to develop a concise instrument to evaluate the subjective aspects of xerostomia.

METHODS

A newly developed questionnaire and a visual analog scale (VAS) were used in analyzing the degree of dry mouth and xerostomia-related problems. The radiation dose received by the major salivary glands was estimated by analyzing two-dimensional simulation films.

RESULTS

Sixty-four percent of the patients experienced a moderate to severe degree of xerostomia. In the multivariate analysis, three questions regarding dry mouth, eating, and speech were particularly discriminatory for establishing the degree of xerostomia as expressed by the VAS score.

CONCLUSIONS

In this survey, 64% of the long-term survivors, after treatment by conventional two-dimensional radiation therapy for a malignancy in the head and neck region, still experienced a moderate to severe degree of permanent xerostomia. A simplified instrument to evaluate xerostomia subjectively can consist of the VAS score and three graded questions.

Assessment of various topical oral formulations by bone marrow transplant recipients

Topical approaches to management of oral mucositis have the advantages of high local concentration and limited or no systemic absorption, reducing the risk of systemic complications. The acceptability of topical therapies in cancer patients has not been evaluated. Thirty-eight transplant patients assessed the acceptability of three formulations (rinse, thin gel, thick gel) of a new compound developed to prevent oral mucositis. The rinse was selected as the most acceptable formulation. The thick gel received the lowest rating. Consistency was a major determinant of overall acceptability. A neutral taste was desirable for most participants. Room temperature of the formulation was rated as completely acceptable. Most participants would be willing to use the rinse or thin gel several times per day, to retain each dose in the oral cavity for up to 5 min, and to swallow it. The support of caregivers may be needed to achieve compliance with such regimens.

Subjective and clinical evaluation of oral lubricants in xerostomic patients

The purpose of this investigation was to evaluate and compare four oral lubricants in relation to oral mucosal status, perceived relief of dry mouth symptoms, and patient acceptance. Three commercial oral lubricants--two sprays and one gel--and a home remedy of margarine were evaluated. Twenty-five xerostomic/salivary gland dysfunctional patients demonstrating < 0.20 mL/min of unstimulated whole saliva participated in the randomized, four-phase, cross-over study. Each phase included a ten-day use of oral lubricants, followed by a four-day washout period. On the first and tenth days of use, lip and buccal mucosa dryness and perceived oral dryness were evaluated. Patient acceptance of the oral lubricant was evaluated at the end of each ten-day period. The Wilcoxon matched-pairs signed-rank test was used to analyze data over time and between-group differences. The gel group reported a statistically significant improvement in perceived oral dryness from Day 1 to Day 10. No other significant within-group differences were found. Subjects rated the gel significantly better than margarine for convenience, perceived value, minutes of relief, and in the "overall" rating. No other significant between-group differences were noted.

Oral health care for the cancer patient

Orofacial complications are common after radiotherapy to the head and neck, and after chemotherapy for malignant disease. Mucositis is the most frequent and often most distressing complication, but adverse reactions can affect all other orofacial tissues. This paper discusses the aetiopathogenesis and current means available for preventing, ameliorating and treating these complications, as well as indicating research directions.