Focal multiepithelial hyperplasia: comparative treatment, glycyrrhizinic acid versus liquid nitrogen
In pediatric population, focal multiepithelial hyperplasia (FMH) ischaracterized by the onset of multiple lesions in the mucosa of themouth; it is associated to the human papillomavirus. Presently, nospecial treatment is preferred, the most widely used is liquid nitrogen(LN) treatment, nevertheless,...
| Autores: | , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Tipo de recurso: | artículo |
| Estado: | Versión publicada |
| Fecha de publicación: | 2015 |
| País: | México |
| Institución: | UNIVERSIDAD NACIONAL AUTÓNOMA DE MÉXICO |
| Repositorio: | Revista Odontológica Mexicana |
| Idioma: | español |
| OAI Identifier: | oai:ojs.pkp.sfu.ca:article/49960 |
| Acceso en línea: | https://revistas.unam.mx/index.php/rom/article/view/49960 |
| Access Level: | acceso abierto |
| Palabra clave: | Focal multiepithelial hyperplasia glycyrrhizinic acid liquid nitrogen. |
| Sumario: | In pediatric population, focal multiepithelial hyperplasia (FMH) ischaracterized by the onset of multiple lesions in the mucosa of themouth; it is associated to the human papillomavirus. Presently, nospecial treatment is preferred, the most widely used is liquid nitrogen(LN) treatment, nevertheless, this is an uncomfortable and painfultreatment for the patient. This would prompt us to look for new, lessinvasive treatment alternatives such as use of glycyrrhizinic acid(GA). Aim: To compare GA effi ciency versus LN in FMH in MexicoChildren’s Hospital patients (HIM) aged 5 to 13 years. To determine clinical epidemiological characteristics as well as adverse effects.Material and methods: The present was a randomized controlled clinical trial. It was divided into two groups: group A was treated with GA applications, four times a day, two atomizer shots, for onemonth. Group B was treated with LN once a month for three months.Results: 20 pediatric-age patients were studied, out of which 11were male and 9 female. 12 patients had relatives affl icted with thedisease. Most frequent topography was the lower lip. Effi ciency ofgroup treated with GA was 63% when compared to group treatedwith LN which exhibited 81% effi ciency. Systemic diverse effects were only observed with use of LN. 0.075 p was obtained (7.5%).Conclusions: GA effi ciency was ascertained although it was lesserthan that of LN. GA can be used as an adjuvant treatment in order todecrease lesions, it elicits minimal local adverse effects. |
|---|