Topical tacrolimus, triamcinolone acetonide, and placebo in oral lichen planus: a pilot randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: To carry out a double-blind randomized controlled trial (RCT) to compare the effectiveness of topical tacrolimus (TAC), triamcinolone acetonide (TRI), and placebo (PLA) in symptomatic oral lichen planus (OLP). SUBJECTS AND METHODS: A clinical score (CS, range 0-130) was developed to measure the clinical signs and symptoms of OLP. Twenty-seven OLP patients with a CS of ≥20 were randomly allocated to receive 0.1% TAC ointment (n = 11), 0.1% TRI paste (n = 7), or Orabase® paste as PLA (n = 9) for 3 weeks. If the CS dropped ≥20% (interpreted as response), the patients continued the same medication for another 3 weeks. If the CS dropped <20% or increased (non-response), the patients were switched to TAC for 6 weeks. A 6-month follow-up period ensued. The primary outcome variable was the change in CS from baseline to week 3. In primary outcome analysis, CS values between the treatment arms were compared. RESULTS: Tacrolimus and TRI were more effective (P = 0.012 and 0.031, respectively) than PLA in reducing the CS at week 3. No difference in the efficacy was noted between TAC and TRI (P = 0.997). CONCLUSIONS: This pilot RCT provides evidence for the effectiveness of TAC and TRI over PLA in the management of OLP.

Comparison between DICOM-calibrated and uncalibrated consumer grade and 6-MP displays under different lighting conditions in panoramic radiography.

OBJECTIVES: To compare observer performance in the detection of anatomical structures and pathology in panoramic radiographs using consumer grade with and without digital imaging and communication in medicine (DICOM)-calibration and 6-megapixel (6-MP) displays under different lighting conditions. METHODS: 30 panoramic radiographs were randomly evaluated on three displays under bright (510 lx) and dim (16 lx) ambient lighting by two observers with different years of experience. Dentinoenamel junction, dentinal caries and periapical inflammatory lesions, visibility of cortical border of the floor and pathological lesions in maxillary sinus were evaluated. Consensus between the observers was considered as reference. Intraobserver agreement was determined. Proportion of equivalent ratings and weighted kappa were used to assess reliability. The level of significance was set to p < 0.05. RESULTS: The proportion of equivalent ratings with consensus differed between uncalibrated and DICOM-calibrated consumer grade displays in dentinal caries in the lower molar in dim lighting (p = 0.021) and between DICOM-calibrated consumer grade and 6-MP display in bright lighting (p = 0.038) for an experienced observer. Significant differences were found between uncalibrated and DICOM-calibrated consumer grade displays in dentinal caries in bright lighting (p = 0.044) and periapical lesions in the upper molar in dim lighting (p = 0.008) for a less experienced observer. Intraobserver reliability was better at detecting dentinal caries than at detecting periapical and maxillary sinus pathology. CONCLUSIONS: DICOM calibration may improve observer performance in panoramic radiography in different lighting conditions. Therefore, a DICOM-calibrated consumer grade display can be used instead of a medical display in dental practice without compromising the diagnostic quality.