High-level laser therapy versus scalpel surgery in the treatment of oral lichen planus: a randomized control trial.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the clinical effectiveness of various types of high-level laser therapy (HLLT) toward scalpel excision for the surgical treatment of erosive oral lichen planus (OLP). MATERIALS AND METHODS: The total number of 128 individuals were enrolled in the study. The 35 did not meet the inclusion criteria due to malignancy signs and presence of diabetes mellitus. In total, 8 were lost to follow-up, and 10 were excluded from the analysis, due to analgesics intake. This way 75 patients with the erosive form of OLP were analyzed in three intervention groups (Er:YAG, n = 19; Nd:YAG, n = 15; Er:YAG + Nd:YAG combination, n = 20) and one control group with scalpel excision (n = 21). The therapy effectiveness has been assessed based on the comparison of salivary interleukin (IL)-1ß, IL-6 and interferon (IFN)-γ preoperative levels to 14, 30 days, and 2 years postoperation, as well as pain level and time of epithelization. RESULTS: All HLLT groups demonstrated a significantly (p > 0.05) higher IL-1ß, IL-6, IFNγ and pain level reduction and quicker epithelization toward the control group on the 30th day, except Nd:YAG in case of IFNγ level. The highest IL-1ß, IFNγ and pain level reduction and quicker epithelization on the 30th day was observed in Er:YAG group, followed by Er:YAG + Nd:YAG combination, Nd:YAG respectively. However no significant difference was observed between the HLLT groups with regard to IL-6 level reduction. After a 2-year follow-up, no significant difference was observed between all study groups with regard to all variables. CONCLUSION: HLLT yields a superior clinical outcome compared to the scalpel excision for the surgical treatment of oral lichen planus, whereby the Er:YAG has been proposed as the most effective laser type at the end of the first postoperative month. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: For the surgical treatment of erosive OLP the Er:YAG laser may be a preferable treatment option compared to Nd:YAG and scalpel surgery. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The present trial was registered retrospectively in the German Clinical Trials Register, as a member of WHO international clinical trials registry platform, on the 18.03.2020 with the following number: DRKS00020986.

Interventions for the management of oral lichen planus: a review of the conventional and novel therapies.

OBJECTIVE: This narrative review focuses on the rationale and role of conventional and newer therapies in the management of oral lichen planus (OLP) with emphasis on randomized controlled trials (RCTs) reported over two decades. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Literature search was conducted to identify RCTs for the management of OLP from 1 January 1995 to 31 December 2015; Medline and Cochrane databases complemented with manual search were used. Primary outcome as resolution of pain was evaluated with the analysis of clinical resolution of erythema and ulceration as secondary outcome. RESULTS: The search provided 260 abstracts, of which 70 full-text articles were included. Majority of trials used topical steroids with very few trials on newer therapies. It was found that topical steroids are effective for symptomatic management of OLP with equal efficacy shown by topical calcineurin inhibitors and retinoids. However, the side effect of transient burning sensation with relapse was more with calcineurin inhibitors. CONCLUSION: Although the newer therapies offer advantage over steroids for the management of OLP in recalcitrant cases, extensive lesions, and cases unresponsive to steroids, but sufficient clinical data on their use are still lacking. Hence, more RCTs with large sample size, adequate treatment duration, and long-term follow-up are required for clinical utility.