Oral Lichenoid Lesion Manifesting as Desquamative Gingivitis: Unlikely Association? Case Report

Oral lichenoid lesion in association with chemotherapy treatment for non-Hodgkin lymphoma or lichen planus? Review of the literature and report of two challenging cases

Background

The diagnosis of oral lichenoid lesions (OLL) remains a challenge for clinicians and pathologists. Although, in many cases, OLL cannot be clinically and histopathologically distinguishable from oral lichen planus (OLP), one important difference between these lesions is that OLL has an identifiable etiological factor, e.g. medication, restorative material, and food allergy. The list of drugs that can cause OLL is extensive and includes anti-inflammatory drugs, anticonvulsants, antihypertensives, antivirals, antibiotics, chemotherapeutics, among others. This work aimed to perform a literature review of OLL related to chemotherapy drugs and to report two cases of possible OLL in patients with B-cell and T-cell non-Hodgkin lymphomas in use of chemotherapy and adjuvant medications. We also discuss the challenge to clinically and histopathologically differentiate OLL and OLP.

Case presentation

In both cases, oral lesions presented reticular, atrophic, erosive/ulcerated, and plaque patterns. The diagnosis of OLL was initially established in both cases by the association of histopathology and history of onset of lesions after the use of medications. Although the patients have presented a significant improvement in the oral clinical picture for more than 2 years of follow-up, they still have some lesions.

Conclusion

A well-detailed anamnesis associated with the drug history, temporal relationship of the appearance of the lesions, and follow-up of patients are fundamental for the diagnosis of OLL related to drugs. Nevertheless, its differentiation from OLP is still a challenge.

Type IV hypersensitivity associated with restorative materials: Clinical report and systematic literature review

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM

Type IV hypersensitivity reactions (Type IV HR) are immune responses mediated by antigen-specific effector T cells.

PURPOSE

The purpose of this clinical report and systematic review was to report the clinicopathological features of Type IV HR in the oral mucosa and to present a systematic literature review of case reports and case series of individuals with Type IV HR in the oral mucosa related to contact with dental materials.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The presented clinical lesions were melanotic macules with burning that affected the internal labial mucosa in contact with composite resin veneer crowns. Histopathological and immunohistochemical analysis of the lesion was performed. The systematic literature review was performed based on a search in 4 electronic databases (PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus, Web of Science, and Ovid).

RESULTS

Immunohistochemistry showed positivity for CD4, CD8, CD20, CD3, tryptase, and CD117. After conservative treatment, the patient reported improvement of symptoms, and a decrease in the number of inflammatory cells was verified. Twenty-one articles were included in the review. Unlike the present patient, the authors of all the articles recommended radical treatment with the removal of the dental material.

CONCLUSIONS

Type IV HR in oral mucosa is rare, and the assessment of clinical and histopathological characteristics is essential to perform an accurate diagnosis and provide appropriate treatment.

Can We Separate Oral Lichen Planus from Allergic Contact Dermatitis and Should We Patch Test? A Systematic Review of Chronic Oral Lichenoid Lesions

This systematic review summarizes characteristics and treatment outcomes of dental amalgam-associated oral lichenoid lesions (OLLs) and oral lichen planus (OLP). Embase and MEDLINE were searched for original studies on OLLs or OLP associated with dental amalgam. Data extraction was completed from 44 studies representing 1855 patients. Removal of amalgam restorations led to complete resolution in 54.2% (n = 423/781), partial resolution in 34.8% (n = 272/781), and no resolution in 11.0% (n = 86/781) of the patients with OLLs, whereas complete resolution occurred in 37.1% (n = 72/194), partial resolution in 26.3% (n = 51/194), and no resolution in 36.6% (n = 71/194) of the patients with OLP. For patients with OLLs, 91.6% of the patients with positive patch tests and 82.9% with negative patch tests had improvement with removal of amalgam, whereas for patients with OLP, 89.2% of the patients with positive patch tests and 78.9% with negative patch tests had improvement with removal of amalgam. Our results suggest improvement occurs, regardless of patch testing status.