Reduction in unstimulated salivary flow rate in burning mouth syndrome

Key Points Enhances the diagnosis of burning mouth syndrome (BMS). Differentiates between BMS and Sjögren's patients. Has the potential to become a very simple tool for clinical diagnosis for BMS. Suggests that one of the aetiologies of BMS relates to autonomic nervous system dysfunction. Backg...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:British dental journal Vol. 217; no. 7; p. E14
Main Authors: Poon, R., Su, N., Ching, V., Darling, M., Grushka, M.
Format: Journal Article
Language:English
Published: London Nature Publishing Group UK 01-10-2014
Nature Publishing Group
Subjects:
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Key Points Enhances the diagnosis of burning mouth syndrome (BMS). Differentiates between BMS and Sjögren's patients. Has the potential to become a very simple tool for clinical diagnosis for BMS. Suggests that one of the aetiologies of BMS relates to autonomic nervous system dysfunction. Background Burning mouth syndrome (BMS) is a chronic condition of burning of the tongue and oral mucosa. It is often accompanied with complaints of xerostomia, although it is unknown whether the dryness is a sensory change similar to the burning sensation or due to hyposalivation. To determine whether there is change in salivary flow rate, whole salivary flows were measured in BMS patients. Methods A clinical ambispective study was conducted. Patients' clinical files were reviewed for stimulated and unstimulated whole salivary flow. Patients were divided into four groups based on diagnosis into Sjögren's syndrome (SS), BMS, BMS taking oral drying medications (BMS-med), and control (C). Whole stimulated (SF) and unstimulated flow (USF) measurements were collected and compared among groups. Data were analysed with ANOVA, Levene's test, Tukey's test and Games-Howell test. Results Twenty SS, 22 BMS, 24 BMS-med and 15 C were included in the study. SF was significantly lower in SS (0.59 ml ± 0.36) compared with BMS (1.56 ml ± 0.65, p <0.001), BMS-med (1.44 ml ± 0.64, p <0.001) and C (2.32 ml ± 1.06, p = 0.001). USF was significantly lower in SS (0.12 ml ± 0.10) compared with BMS (0.30 ml ± 0.18, p = 0.002), BMS-med (0.27 ml ± 0.21, p = 0.022) and C (0.52 ml ± 0.26, p <0.001). SF was not significantly different between BMS and C (p = 0.172) and BMS-med and C (p = 0.096). Both BMS and BMS-med had significantly lower USF compared with C (p = 0.040 and p = 0.018 respectively). SF in BMS was not significantly affected by number of oral drying medications (p = 0.254); however, USF was significantly lower with two or more oral drying medications (0.13 ml ± 0.07) compared with one oral drying medication (0.32 ml ± 0.22) (p = 0.034). Conclusion BMS patients have statistically significant decreased unstimulated salivary flow rate with non-statistically significant decreased stimulated flow rate. Salivary flow rates in BMS patients are decreased further by medication usage whose side effects include dry mouth. This suggests that hyposalivation may play a role in causing dry mouth in BMS, which may respond to treatment with a sialogogue.
Bibliography:ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 23
ISSN:0007-0610
1476-5373
DOI:10.1038/sj.bdj.2014.884