Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 3 de 3
Filtrar
Mais filtros

Base de dados
Ano de publicação
Tipo de documento
País de afiliação
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol ; 281(2): 827-833, 2024 Feb.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37906367

RESUMO

OBJECTIVES: To study the diagnostic value of salivary pepsin tests for detecting laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR) in patients with primary burning mouth syndrome (BMS). METHODS: Patients with BMS and asymptomatic individuals were consecutively recruited from September 2018 to June 2023. Patients underwent hypopharyngeal-esophageal impedance pH-monitoring (HEMII-pH) and saliva collections to measure pepsin. Stomatology evaluation was carried out to exclude other causes of BMS. Oral, pharyngeal and laryngeal signs and symptoms were evaluated with Reflux Sign Assessment (RSA) and Reflux Symptom Score (RSS). Sensitivity, specificity, positive (PPV) and negative (NPV) predictive values of pepsin test were calculated considering the highest values of pepsin tests at ≥ 16, ≥ 36, and ≥ 100 ng/mL cutoffs. Receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC) was evaluated. RESULTS: Forty-nine patients with both BMS and LPR at the HEMII-pH and 21 asymptomatic individuals were recruited. Pepsin test was 83.7%, 79.6%, and 71.4% sensitive at cutoffs ≥ 16, ≥ 36, and ≥ 100 ng/mL, respectively. The ROC analysis reported that a threshold of ≥ 21.5 ng/mL was associated with sensitivity, specificity, PPV and NPV of 81.6%, 81.0%, 90.1% and 65.4%, respectively. The severity score of burning mouth symptom was significantly associated with the saliva pepsin concentration (rs = 0.263; p = 0.029) and the oral RSA (rs = 0.474; p = 0.007). CONCLUSION: Pepsin test is a valuable diagnostic approach for detecting LPR in patients with BMS. Patients with high level of saliva pepsin reported more severe burning mouth symptoms. Future studies are needed to confirm the role of LPR in the primary BMS.


Assuntos
Síndrome da Ardência Bucal , Refluxo Laringofaríngeo , Humanos , Saliva/química , Pepsina A/análise , Síndrome da Ardência Bucal/etiologia , Síndrome da Ardência Bucal/complicações , Estudos Prospectivos , Monitoramento do pH Esofágico , Refluxo Laringofaríngeo/complicações , Refluxo Laringofaríngeo/diagnóstico , Impedância Elétrica
2.
J Craniofac Surg ; 34(1): 145-152, 2023.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36217228

RESUMO

Titanium plates and screws are essential devices in maxillofacial surgery since late 1980s, but despite their wide use there is no consensus in titanium internal fixators removal after bone healing. A systematic literature review and meta-analysis were conducted on seventeen retrospective studies. Effect size and 95% confidence intervals were calculated for plate removal (per plate and per patient) and for removal causes (infection, pain, screws complications, exposition, palpability). Odds ratio, 95% confidence intervals, and χ 2 test were measured for sex, smoking, and implant site. Heterogeneity was evaluated with Cochran and Inconstancy test. Obtained data were used to design Forest and Funnel plots. The aim of the study is to identify and clarify reasons and risk factors for plates and screws removal. Infection is the most frequent reason; the habit of tobacco usage and implant site (mandibula) are the main risk factors. The administration of antibiotic prophylaxis is essential, and patients must quit smoking before and after surgery. In conclusion there is no scientific evidence supporting the removal of internal devices as mandatory step of the postoperative procedure.


Assuntos
Cirurgia Bucal , Titânio , Humanos , Estudos Retrospectivos , Placas Ósseas , Mandíbula/cirurgia , Remoção de Dispositivo , Fixação Interna de Fraturas/métodos
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA