Síndrome de Boca Ardiente
ICD-10 K14.6 · ICD-11 DA0F

Cuando el Síndrome de Boca Ardiente Persiste Tras el Ácido Alfa Lipoico o la Terapia Anticonvulsivante

El síndrome de boca ardiente provoca un dolor ardiente oral persistente que puede resultar refractario al tratamiento inicial. Cuando un régimen de primera línea centrado en ácido alfa lipoico o agentes anticonvulsivantes no ha proporcionado un alivio adecuado del dolor, se hace relevante un conjunto distinto de intervenciones alternativas.

Tratamiento Previo — Respuesta Inadecuada

El tratamiento de primera línea con ácido alfa lipoico o anticonvulsivantes (incluidos gabapentina y pregabalina) no logró alcanzar los objetivos terapéuticos: una reducción significativa del dolor ardiente oral en la escala VAS, ni un beneficio sostenido en la evaluación a largo plazo más allá de tres meses.

Enfoque de Siguiente Línea (Visión Parcial)

El paso siguiente recurre a alternativas con evidencia limitada pero documentada, que incluyen preparaciones herbales y de origen vegetal, medicamentos de distintas clases farmacológicas y opciones de intervención no farmacológicas — el protocolo estructurado completo especifica cuáles considerar y en qué condiciones.

Objetivo Clínico

Reducción del dolor ardiente oral, evaluada mediante escalas de dolor validadas (puntuación VAS/VNS).

Acceso Inmediato a Regímenes Estructurados Basados en Evidencia

References

DOI: 10.1177/03331024211036152

Catuama shows promising VNS (0–10) score reduction results compared to placebo with a minimal adverse effect of sleep alteration observed in the study (SMD 0.68, 95% CI 1.21 to 0.16).

At the end of 12 weeks of therapy, there was a reduction in the number of oral mucosa burning sites and improved ability to cope with the burning pain, there was no statistically significant difference with the placebo group (SMD 0.23, 95% CI 0.87 to 0.41).

Ottaviani et al. revealed a short-term (60 days) benefit with 1200 mg/day umPEA in BMS patients (SMD 0.70, 95% CI 1.39 to 0.01) but declining pain relief at 4 months (SMD 0.26, 95% CI 0.94 to 0.41) compared to placebo group.

Administration of 100 mg trazodone daily for the first 4 days followed by 200 mg for 8 weeks significantly decreased patients' VNS pain intensity against baseline (MD 13.9, p < 0.01), but there was no significant difference with the placebo group (SMD 0.06, 95% CI 0.72 to 0.59; RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.61–1.49).

The use of citalopram 10 mg daily followed by an increment to 20 mg after 1 week showed an improvement of VAS score of 87.45% (MD: 7.8, p < 0.001).

Crocin showed a significant reduction in VAS score (MD 7.8, p < 0.001) and has a similar improvement 87.5% of burning mouth score as citalopram.

A cross-over clinical trial involving intervention with a high melatonin dosage (12 mg/day) did not provide pain relief (SMD 0.24, 95% CI 0.39 to 0.87; RR 1.18, 95% CI 0.31–4.43) and sleep score improvement compared to placebo.

A combination of topical spray and swallowing of 900 ppm LVO daily for 12 weeks led to a significant reduction in the median pain score (MD 3.0, p < 0.001) and burning (MD 1.0, p = 0.003) compared to baseline, but there was no significant difference (p = 0.99) when compared with the placebo group.

Ten days of 30,000 pulses of rTMS therapy over the left GDLPFC significantly reduced VAS score (MD: 3.1, p = 0.002) with 75% of patients reporting a decrease in pain intensity of more than 50% compared to baseline.

The hypothesis of wearing the tongue protector to prevent continuous irritation of tongue on teeth or denture has a statistically significant difference in improvement in VAS score between wearer (MD 3.6) and non-wearer with habitual avoidance reminder (MD 1.4, p < 0.001; SMD 1.15, 95% CI 1.76 to 0.54).

View source ↗