Search

Background: To assess if photobiostimulation (PBS) alleviates pain intensity/duration and swelling after implant surgery. Material and Methods: Sixty subjects (27 male and 33 female, with a mean age of 47,13 ± 8.05 years) were included and randomly assigned to experimental group (implant surgery and photobiostimulation), placebo group (implant surgery and simulated photobiostimulation) and control group (implant surgery only). Inclusion criteria: subjects older than 20 years, with a healthy oral mucosa and requiring implant surgery. Exclusion criteria: pregnancy, history of implant failure, light sensitivity, metabolic deseases, consumption of antibiotics or corticosteroids in the last two weeks, smokers and alcohol drinkers. Patients reported the pain experienced by using a numeric rating scale (NRS) at 2 hours, 6 hours, 12 hours, 24 hours and from day 2 to 7. Swelling score was assessed by linear measurements and type and number of analgesic drugs within each time-point were recorded on a spreadsheet. Data of pain and amount of swelling were compared among the three groups by using the Kruskal-Wallis H Test and post-hoc comparisons tests. Results: Pain in the experimental group was less compared to controls and placebo group, at each time intervals (p < 0.001) as well as the maximum pain score (experimental group: median = 2, interquartile range 2-3; control group: median = 8, interquartile range 3,75-9; placebo group: median = 8, interquartile range 6,25-9). Swelling was almost insignificant in the experimental group (maximum value = 1, interquartile range 0-2,75, at 24 hours) compared with control (maximum value = 6, interquartile range 5-8,75, at 24 hours) and placebo (maximum value = 6, interquartile range 5-8, at 24 hours). Subjects in the experimental group assumed less analgesics compared to both controls and placebo groups. Conclusions: Photobiostimulation is an effective method to reduce pain intensity/duration and swelling after implant surgery.

Aims. Burning pain is considered characteristic of chronic neuropathic pain condition in general, and so me recent data seem to suggest peripheral or central nervous system involvement as possible underlying factor in BM3. This study was designed to determinate if burning mouth symptoms could be originated from a peripheal neuropathy of small diameter nerve fibres. Material and methods. The material of the study consisted of 25 patients (18 female, 7 male, 30-75 years; means 54 years). In all patients there were not: oral muco membranes lesions, oral muco membranes diseases, oral correlated diseases, oral dysfunctions, dental and periodontal diseases. Besides there were: no evidence of central nervous system pathology, no evidence of peripheral nervous system pathology, no presence of organic body disfunctions. AIIpatients didn't show significant alterations of blood investigations. AIIpatients were undermitted to our protocol including: oral and facial c1inicalexaminations, neurological exam, blood investigations, Mc Gill Pain Questionnaire, VAS(visual analogical scale), biopsy of tongue mucosa with hystological and immunofluorescence exams, quantitative somatosensory thermotest and teletermography examination of tongue mucosa. ResuIts. These examinations have showed subclinical polineurophaty in 50% of patients. In particular were observed a loss of function in small diameter nervous fibres in about 50% of patients. Hystological exam of mucosal tongue revealed a moderate atrophy and alterations of structures. Conclusion. Etiology, pathogenetic processes, c1inicaland diagnostic approaches, therapeutical resolutions and researches of burning mouth syndrome are not c1ear yet. The local alterations of small diameter sensitive nerve fibres could cause an increase of oral burning, without muco membranes pathologies. These locallesions could justify the bms c1inicalsymptomatology. The hystological alteration of small diameter sensitive nerve fibres could involve meaningf