MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 231 OSMF patients were selected and treated with basic regime including topical corticosteroids, oral antioxidants and the icecream-stick exercise regime and allotted randomly to two equal groups A and B. Group-A patients were additionally given MED. Subgroups A1 and B1 patients with an inter-incisal distance (IID) 20-35mm were not given any additional therapy; subgroup A2 and B2 patients (IID 20-35mm) were treated additionally with intra-lesional injections. Subgroups A3 and B3 with IID<20mm were managed surgically. IID was measured at baseline and at 6 months recall. The change in IID measurements was calculated and statistically analyzed using 2-way ANOVA and Tukeys multiple post hoc analysis.
RESULTS: Average improvement in IID after six months of recall visits was observed to be 8.4 mm in subgroup-A1 (n-53) compared to 5.5 mm in B1(n-50) (p<0.01). The IID improvement in subgroup-A2 was found to be 9.3mm (n-46) compared to 5.1 mm in B2 (n-48) (p<0.01). In the surgery group, mouth opening improvement was observed to be 9.6 mm in subgroup A3 (n-18) compared to 4.8 mm for B3 (n-16) (p<0.01).
CONCLUSIONS: Use of the MED appears to be effective for increasing oral opening in OMSF patients in conjunction with local, injection and/or surgical treatment.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: The literature search was carried out on two electronic databases (PubMed and Cochrane Library). Randomized controlled trials (RCT) published from January 2011 to September 2022 were included. The bias risk was evaluated using Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool 2.0. Further screening was done for meta-analysis according to modified Newcastle-Ottawa scoring criteria. Forest plot was generated using a statistical method of inverse variance of random effect with 95% confidence interval.
RESULTS: A total of 8 randomized controlled trials were included for systematic review out of which four studies were based on tooth-supported fixed prosthesis and remaining four were based on implant-supported prosthesis. Further screening was conducted and three studies were eligible for meta-analysis. Tooth-supported fixed prosthesis fabricated from digital impression showed no significant difference in the marginal fit in any region measured, except for occlusal region where conventional impression showed more favorable marginal fit. Implant-supported prosthesis fabricated from digital impression showed survival rates ranging from 97.3 to 100% and there was no statistically significant difference in marginal bone loss (p = 0.14).
CONCLUSION: Implant-supported prostheses fabricated from digital and conventional impressions show no significant differences in their clinical outcomes. Tooth-supported fixed prostheses fabricated from digital impression have shown favorable findings in terms of marginal fit. Despite that, there is still lack of clinical trials with larger sample size and longer follow-up periods. Future studies that fulfill these two criteria are deemed necessary.
METHODS: We used logistic regression adjusted for age, education and area to examine associations between reproductive factors and GBC risk, using 790 cases of histologically confirmed GBC and group-matched 1726 visitor controls. We tested the interaction of these associations by genetic variants known to increase the risk of GBC.
RESULTS: Parity was strongly positively associated with GBC risk: each additional pregnancy was associated with an ∼25% higher risk {odds ratio [OR] 1.26 [95% confidence interval (95% CI) 1.17-1.37]}. After controlling for parity, GBC risk was weakly positively associated with later age of menarche [postmenopausal women, OR 1.11 (95% CI 1.00-1.22) per year], earlier menopause [OR 1.03 (95% CI 1.00-1.06) per year] and shorter reproductive lifespan [OR 1.04 (95% CI 1.01-1.07) per year], but there was little evidence of an association with breastfeeding duration or years since last pregnancy. Risk alleles of single-nucleotide polymorphisms in the ABCB4 and ABCB1 genetic regions had a multiplicative effect on the association with parity, but did not interact with other reproductive factors.
CONCLUSIONS: We observed higher GBC risk with higher parity and shorter reproductive lifespan, suggesting an important role for reproductive and hormonal factors.