Comparative Evaluation of Efficacy and Safety of the Diode Laser (980 nm) and Sclerotherapy for the Treatment of Oral Pyogenic Granuloma.
Journal
International journal of dentistry
ISSN: 1687-8728
Titre abrégé: Int J Dent
Pays: Egypt
ID NLM: 101524183
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2022
2022
Historique:
received:
15
07
2022
revised:
30
08
2022
accepted:
05
09
2022
entrez:
27
9
2022
pubmed:
28
9
2022
medline:
28
9
2022
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Pyogenic granuloma (PG) is a tumor-like, non-neoplastic lesion of the soft tissue that commonly appears in the oral cavity. Various treatment modalities have been discussed, including surgical excision, cryosurgery, curettage, electrodessication, corticosteroid injection, sclerotherapy, and lasers. This observational retrospective study compared effectiveness between diode lasers and sclerotherapy for PG treatment. From July 2016 to January 2021, data of oral PG cases treated with sclerotherapy and diode lasers were gathered. Patients were evaluated and categorized according to their gender, sex, site of lesions, size of lesions, number of sessions, details of side effects, details of the VAS (Visual Analogue Scale) on third postoperative day, response of treatment to individual groups, time required for complete resolution, and details of recurrence. Inferential statistical analysis was performed. We included 73 patients, of whom 43 and 30 received laser and sclerotherapy treatment, respectively. Compared with the sclerotherapy group, the laser group had less side effects including pain, edema, ulceration, ecchymosis, infections, and scarring. The difference in postoperative pain (VAS scale) between the groups was statistically significant ( Both sclerotherapy with laser and 3% sodium tetradecyl sulfate are effective for treating oral PG. Sclerotherapy is more effective in preventing recurrence. In terms of side effects, diode lasers are superior to sclerotherapy.
Sections du résumé
Background
UNASSIGNED
Pyogenic granuloma (PG) is a tumor-like, non-neoplastic lesion of the soft tissue that commonly appears in the oral cavity. Various treatment modalities have been discussed, including surgical excision, cryosurgery, curettage, electrodessication, corticosteroid injection, sclerotherapy, and lasers. This observational retrospective study compared effectiveness between diode lasers and sclerotherapy for PG treatment.
Materials and Methods
UNASSIGNED
From July 2016 to January 2021, data of oral PG cases treated with sclerotherapy and diode lasers were gathered. Patients were evaluated and categorized according to their gender, sex, site of lesions, size of lesions, number of sessions, details of side effects, details of the VAS (Visual Analogue Scale) on third postoperative day, response of treatment to individual groups, time required for complete resolution, and details of recurrence. Inferential statistical analysis was performed.
Results
UNASSIGNED
We included 73 patients, of whom 43 and 30 received laser and sclerotherapy treatment, respectively. Compared with the sclerotherapy group, the laser group had less side effects including pain, edema, ulceration, ecchymosis, infections, and scarring. The difference in postoperative pain (VAS scale) between the groups was statistically significant (
Conclusions
UNASSIGNED
Both sclerotherapy with laser and 3% sodium tetradecyl sulfate are effective for treating oral PG. Sclerotherapy is more effective in preventing recurrence. In terms of side effects, diode lasers are superior to sclerotherapy.
Identifiants
pubmed: 36164597
doi: 10.1155/2022/8269221
pmc: PMC9509284
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
8269221Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2022 Peeyush Shivhare et al.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.
Références
J Cosmet Laser Ther. 2014 Aug;16(4):197-200
pubmed: 24689434
J Oral Sci. 2006 Dec;48(4):167-75
pubmed: 17220613
N Y State Dent J. 2013 Jun-Jul;79(4):55-7
pubmed: 24027901
J Periodontal Res. 2000 Jun;35(3):165-71
pubmed: 10929871
Am J Case Rep. 2021 Jun 19;22:e929690
pubmed: 34146391
J Indian Soc Periodontol. 2021 Mar-Apr;25(2):162-165
pubmed: 33888950
Indian J Dermatol Venereol Leprol. 2011 Mar-Apr;77(2):222-31
pubmed: 21393966
J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg. 2010 Aug;63(8):1364-8
pubmed: 19625228
J Clin Epidemiol. 2020 Jul;123:100-106
pubmed: 32259582
Lasers Surg Med. 1999;25(5):401-6
pubmed: 10602132
J Lasers Med Sci. 2014 Fall;5(4):199-205
pubmed: 25653822
Natl J Maxillofac Surg. 2019 Jan-Jun;10(1):3-7
pubmed: 31205381
J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2010 Sep;68(9):2185-8
pubmed: 20417014