Àá½Ã¸¸ ±â´Ù·Á ÁÖ¼¼¿ä. ·ÎµùÁßÀÔ´Ï´Ù.

±¸°­ ÆíÆòż± ȯÀÚ¿¡¼­ Corticosteroid ±¹¼ÒµµÆ÷ È¿°ú

Treatment Outcome of Oral Lichen Planus by Topical Application of Corticosteroid

´ëÇѱ¸°­³»°úÇÐȸÁö 2004³â 29±Ç 4È£ p.321 ~ 328
¼Ò¼Ó »ó¼¼Á¤º¸
ÀÌÁ¤À± ¸íÈÆ/±è¸íÁø/°íÈ«¼·

Abstract

±¸°­ ÆòÆòż±Àº ±¸°­Á¡¸·¿¡ ¹ß»ýÇÏ´Â ¸¸»ý ¿°Áõ¼º ÁúȯÀ¸·Î, ÇǺγª Á¡¸·¿¡¼­ À¯µµµÈ Ç׿øº¯È­¿¡ ´ëÇÑ ¼¼Æ÷¸Å°³¼º ¸é¿ª¹ÝÀÀ°úÀÇ °ü·Ã¼ºÀÌ ¾Ë·ÁÁ® ÀÖÀ¸³ª, ¾ÆÁ÷ ±× ¿øÀÎÀÌ ¸íÈ®ÇÏ°Ô ¹àÇôÁ® ÀÖÁö ¾Ê°í, Ä¡·á¿¡ À־µµ Áõ»óÀÇ ¿ÏÈ­¸¦ ¸ñÇ¥·Î ÇÏ°í ÀÖ´Ù º» ¿¬±¸´Â ÇåÀç ±¸°­ ÆíÆòż±ÀÇ °¡Á¤ ÀϹÝÀûÀÎ Ä¡·á¹ýÀ¸·Î »ç¿ëµÇ°í ÀÖ´Â corticosteroidsÀÇ Àû¿ë¿¡ À־ 0.1% dexamethasone ±¹¼ÒÀû¿ëÀÇ È¿°ú¸¦ ¾Ë¾Æº¸°í, ¿¬°íÁ¦Á¦¿Í ¿ë¾×Á¦ÀçÀÇ ¾àÇ°¼º»ó¿¡ µû¸¥ Ä¡·áÈ¿°úÀÇ Â÷À̸¦ ºñ±³ ºÐ¼®ÇÏ°íÀÚ ½ÃÇàµÇ¾ú´Ù. 1 À̸¦ À§ÇÏ¿© ¼­¿ï´ëÇб³ Ä¡°úº´¿ø ±¸°­³»°ú¿¡ ³»¿øÇÑ È¯ÀÚ Áß º´¸®Á¶Á÷ °Ë»ç °á°ú ±¸°­ ÆíÆòż±À¸·Î È®ÁøµÈ 46¸í(³²ÀÚ 13¸í, ¿©ÀÚ 33¸í Æò±Õ¿¬·É 546¡¾113 ¼¼)À» ´ë»óÀ¸·Î ¿ë¾× ±º (22¸í)°ú ¿¬°í ±º (24¸í)À¸·Î ¹«ÀÛÀ§·Î ³ª´©°í, Ä¡·á Àü, Ä¡·á 2ÁÖ, 4ÁÖ, 8ÁÖÀÇ reticular, atrophic, e°³³Äve º´¼Ò Å©±â¿Í ȯÀÚÀÇ ÅëÁõ ¹× ÀÛ¿­°¨ÀÇ Á¤µµ¸¦ Á¶»çÇÏ¿´´Ù. ±¸°­ ÆíÆòż±Àº erosive type(54.3%)ÀÌ °¡Àå ¸¹¾Ò°í ±× ´ÙÀ½À¸·Î´Â erosive type(59.1%), reticular type(65%)¼ø À̾úÀ¸¸ç, ÇùÁ¡¸· (96%)°ú ÁöÀº ¹× ÀÜÁ¸Ä¡Á¶Á¦ (78%)¿¡ È£¹ßÇÏ¿´´Ù. 8 ÁÖ°£ÀÇ Ä¡·á ±â°£À» ¸¶Ä£ ȯÀÚµé (¿ë¾× ±º 16¸í, ¿¬°í ±º l3¸í)ÀÇ °á°ú¸¦ repeated measures analysis of variances¸¦ ½ÃÇàÇÏ¿© ºÐ¼®ÇÑ °á°ú. 0.1% dexamethasone ±¹¼ÒµµÆ÷ Ä¡·á°¡ ±¸±ë ÆíÆòÅ»êÀÇ º´¼Ò Å©±â ¹× Áõ»óÀ» Åë°èÀûÀ¸·Î À¯ÀÇÇÏ°Ô °¨¼Ò½ÃÅ° ³ª ¿ë¾×°ú Àΰí·Î ³ª´« ¾àÁ¦¼º»ó¿¡ µû¶ó¼­´Â Â÷ÀÌ°¡ ¾øÀ½À» ¾Ë ¼ö ÀÖ¾ú´Ù.

Oral lichen planus is one of the most common chrome inflammatory mucosal diseases In the oral cavity Although the current evidence suggests that It is a cell-mediated immunity reaction against epithelial basal cells, the exact epiothogy of oral lichen planus remains uncertain and the primary goal of treatment is palliation or alleviation of symptoms In the present study, the treatment outcome of oral lichen planus by topical application of 0.1% dexamethasone was evaluated and the efficacy of ointment and solution of 0.1% dexamethasone was compared Forty-six patients (13 male, 33 female, mean age 54.6¡¾11.3) diagnosed as oral lichen planus by biopsy in the Seoul National University Dental Hospital were enrolled and divided randomly into two groups by form of drug prescribed, ointment and solution The size of reticular, atrophic, and erosive lesion was measured by §± and pam and during sensation was assessed by visual analogue scale before and at 2, 4, and 8 weeks after treatment The most common form of oral lichen planus was atrophic type (54.3%) and erosive type (39.1%) was the next Buccal mucosa (96%) and gingiva and alveolar ridge (78%) were common occurrence sites The records of 29 patients (16 in solution group, 13 in ointment group) who finished 8 weeks¢¥ treatment period were analyzed by repeated measures analysis of variances The size of reticular, atrophic, and erosive lesion and pam and burning sensation was decreased significantly, but there was in difference in efficacy between two groups.

Å°¿öµå

¿ø¹® ¹× ¸µÅ©¾Æ¿ô Á¤º¸

  

µîÀçÀú³Î Á¤º¸

KCI