Efficacy of the laser at low intensity on primary burning oral syndrome: a systematic review

Abstract

Background Primary burning mouth syndrome (BMS) is a chronic clinical condition of idiopathic mainly characterized by pain and a burning sensation in the oral cavity. The application of laser at low intensity therapy is a treatment option. This systematic review evaluated the efficacy of laser therapy in treating symptoms of burning mouth syndrome. Material and Methods The study was formulated according to the PRISMA and Cochrane guidelines. Seven databases were used as primary sources of research. Only randomized controlled clinical trials were included. The efficacy of the therapy was estimated comparing the values of the visual and numerical scales of pain before and after laser treatment, through qualitative analysis. Results The search resulted in 348 records and only eight filled the eligibility criteria and were included. All studies evaluated pain and / or a burning sensation considering a time interval of two to ten weeks. The total sample consisted of 314 patients submitted to treatment: 123 from the control group, who participated with laser off or with the tip blocked, and 191 from the intervention group, treated with low-level laser therapy. The female gender stood out and the average age of the participants was 60.89 years. The main symptoms reported were pain and a burning sensation in the oral mucosa and tongue. The parameters adopted by the authors for laser treatment were diverse and the variables were not fully described in the published studies. Visual analog and numerical scales were used to assess symptoms and only three studies showed statistical significance. Conclusions It is suggested that laser therapy may be an effective alternative in the treatment of BMS. New randomized clinical trials should consider well-established protocols to better understand the efficacy of laser therapy without confounding the effects. Key words: Efficacy, systematic review, burning mouth syndrome, low level laser therapy.

Eficácia da catuama® e da terapia com laser de baixa potência no tratamento da síndrome da ardência bucal: uma revisão da literatura

“…No primeiro grupo, muitas das opções utilizadas são fármacos que exercem uma atividade mais ampla no corpo humano e o deixa mais susceptível a efeitos colaterais e indesejáveis, porém, é claro, que uma avaliação minuciosa precisa ser realizada a fim de verificar se esses fármacos funcionariam contra outros problemas concomitantes a SAB. Além disso, dentre as terapias não farmacológicas e que podem ser realizadas pelo cirurgião dentista, a que se destaca e demonstra melhores resultados é a TLBI (Zhang et al, 2021;Matos et al, 2021;Liu al., 2018).…”

“…A TLBI vem assegurando seus efeitos positivos no tratamento da SAB (Matos et al, 2021). Arduino et al (2016) compararam em seu estudo os efeitos fotobiomoduladores da TLBI e os efeitos farmacológicos do clonazepam.…”

“…A literatura tem avaliado a eficácia de várias formas de tratamento para a SAB, seja com fármacos ou terapias não farmacológicas. Dentre essas opções encontram-se o ácido alfa-lipóico, clonazepam, psicoterapia, capsaicina, vitaminas, cloridrato de benzidamina, bupivacaína, catuama®, azeite de oliva, trazodona, uréia, Hypericum perforatum e o laser de baixa intensidade (Liu et al, 2018;Matos et al, 2021).…”

Efficacy of Topical Intervention for Recurrent Aphthous Stomatitis: A Network Meta-Analysis

“…The laser, in our opinion, is an absolute landmark in clinical practice for the treatment of oral mucosal diseases. It is remarkable in common oral mucosal diseases and even precancerous lesions, such as oral mucositis due to radiotherapy and chemotherapy [101], oral submucosal fibrosis [102], oral lichen planus [103], oral leukoplakia [104] and burning mouth syndrome [105]. The effect of the laser on the oral mucosa has been interpreted as a stimulating biological effect [106].…”

Efficacy of photobiomodulation in reducing pain and improving the quality of life in patients with idiopathic burning mouth syndrome. A systematic review and meta-analysis

“…Recently published systematic reviews on PBM [ 44 , 45 ] include articles that were excluded from our study because they used pain scales with different scores [ 42 ], because they did not have a control group, or because the data provided was insufficient to be included in a meta-analysis [ 42 , 46 ]. In this way, and after verifying the powerful biases of these studies, the present study was justified.…”