Bakirtzi Katerina, Papadimitriou Ilias, Andreadis Dimitrios, Sotiriou Elena
First Department of Dermatology and Venereology, School of Medicine, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, P.O. Box 54643 Thessaloniki, Greece.
Department of Oral Medicine and Pathology, School of Dentistry, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, P.O. Box 54624 Thessaloniki, Greece.
Cancers (Basel). 2021 Jul 4;13(13):3354. doi: 10.3390/cancers13133354.
Actinic cheilitis is a premalignant condition that may evolve to squamous cell carcinoma. A consensus on its management has not been established, and large clinical trials are lacking. We aimed to review the existing data regarding the treatment of actinic cheilitis with various modalities regarding safety, efficacy, recursions, and post-treatment malignant transformation. A systematic review was conducted through Pubmed, Ovid and the Cochrane library for studies in English language and the references of included papers from inception to January 2021. Case series were considered if ≥6 patients were included. Of the 698 articles, 36 studies and, overall, 699 patients were eventually reviewed. Laser ablation and vermilionectomy provided the best clinical and aesthetic outcomes with few recurrences, while photodynamic therapy was linked to more relapses. Generally, the adverse events were minor and there was no risk of post-treatment malignant transformation. The limitations of our review include the heterogeneity and the small number of patients across studies. Conclusively, invasive treatments demonstrated superior therapeutic and safety profile. Nevertheless, high-quality head-to-head studies that assess different modalities for actinic cheilitis and report patient preferences are lacking.
光化性唇炎是一种可能演变为鳞状细胞癌的癌前病变。目前尚未就其治疗达成共识,且缺乏大型临床试验。我们旨在回顾有关光化性唇炎各种治疗方式在安全性、疗效、复发情况及治疗后恶变方面的现有数据。通过PubMed、Ovid和Cochrane图书馆进行系统综述,检索自起始至2021年1月的英文研究以及纳入论文的参考文献。若纳入患者≥6例,则纳入病例系列研究。在698篇文章中,最终纳入36项研究,共699例患者进行综述。激光消融和唇红切除术提供了最佳的临床和美学效果,复发较少,而光动力疗法复发较多。总体而言,不良事件轻微,且无治疗后恶变风险。我们综述的局限性包括研究间的异质性和患者数量较少。总之,侵入性治疗显示出更好的治疗和安全性。然而,缺乏评估光化性唇炎不同治疗方式并报告患者偏好的高质量对比研究。