Tratamento tópico para xerostomia pós-radioterapia para câncer de cabeça e pescoço – Revisão Sistemática

The purpose of this systematic review was to compare the effectiveness of topical treatments to minimize post-radiotherapy xerostomia. PubMed, Cochrane Library (CENTRAL) and LILACS databases were searched without restriction on date or language until the 6thAugust, 2015. Key-wordsused for searching were radiotherapy, xerostomia and saliva. Two independent reviewers screened titles and abstracts, carried out data extraction and assessed risk of bias. The first search identified 429 articles. From these, 117 studies were selected for full-text reading, from which 18 were included in the qualitative synthesis. From the eighteen articles included, seven were non- controlled clinical trial, one article was controlled clinical trial and ten studies were randomized clinical trials (three clinical trials were placebo controlled and seven were crossover). By the assessment of the quality of the studies included, ten showed high risk of bias, four showed moderate risk of bias and four presented low risk of bias. All interventions were considered effective in treating xerostomia (mucin, polysaccharides, aloe vera, rape oil, linseed oil, carboxymethylcellulose, polyethylene oxide, pilocarpine and systems of care for xerostomia - gel, paste and mouthwash). Meta-analysis could not be performed due to heterogeneity between thestudiesand interventions. This systematic review showed that a single and general protocol for topical treatment of xerostomia post-radiotherapy does not exist and that follow-up visits should be performed to validate the individualized treatment plan.

Avaliação comparativa da remodelação óssea periimplantar em implantes com junção cone-morse e hexágono externo: estudo clínico randomizado controlado, duplo cego, boca dividida

Background: Several theories, such as the biological width formation, the inflammatory reactions due to the implant-abutment microgap contamination, and the periimplant stress/strain concentration causing bone microdamage accumulation, have been suggested to explain early periimplant bone loss. However, it is yet not well understood to which extent the implant-abutment connection type may influence the remodeling process around dental implants. Aim: to evaluate clinical, bacteriological, and biomechanical parameters related to periimplant bone loss at the crestal region, comparing external hexagon (EH) and Morse-taper (MT) connections. Materials and methods: Twelve patients with totally edentulous mandibles received four custom made Ø 3.8 x 13 mm implants in the interforaminal region of the mandible, with the same design, but different prosthetic connections (two of them EH or MT, randomly placed based on a split-mouth design), and a immediate implant- supported prosthesis. Clinical parameters (periimplant probing pocket depth, modified gingival index and mucosal thickness) were evaluated at 6 sites around the implants, at a 12 month follow-up. The distance from the top of the implant to the first bone-to-implant contact – IT-FBIC was evaluated on standardized digital peri-apical radiographs acquired at 1, 3, 6 and 12 months follow-up. Samples of the subgingival microbiota were collected 1, 3 and 6 months after implant loading. DNA were extracted and used for the quantification of Tanerella forsythia, Porphyromonas gingivalis, Aggragatibacter actinomycetemcomitans, Prevotella intermedia and Fusobacterium nucleatum. Comparison among multiple periods of observation were performed using repeated-measures Analysis of Variance (ANOVA), followed by a Tukey post-hoc test, while two-period based comparisons were made using paired t- test. Further, 36 computer-tomographic based finite element (FE) models were accomplished, simulating each patient in 3 loading conditions. The results for the peak EQV strain in periimplant bone were interpreted by means of a general linear model (ANOVA). Results: The variation in periimplant bone loss assessed by means of radiographs was significantly different between the connection types (P<0.001). Mean IT-FBIC was 1.17±0.44 mm for EH, and 0.17±0.54 mm for MT, considering all evaluated time periods. All clinical parameters presented not significant differences. No significant microbiological differences could be observed between both connection types. Most of the collected samples had very few pathogens, meaning that these regions were healthy from a microbiological point of view. In FE analysis, a significantly higher peak of EQV strain (P=0.005) was found for EH (mean 3438.65 µ∑) compared to MT (mean 840.98 µ∑) connection. Conclusions: Varying implant-abutment connection type will result in diverse periimplant bone remodeling, regardless of clinical and microbiological conditions. This fact is more likely attributed to the singular loading transmission through different implant-abutment connections to the periimplant bone. The present findings suggest that Morse-taper connection is more efficient to prevent periimplant bone loss, compared to an external hexagon connection.