Abstract
Introduction Oral lichen planus (OLP) and oral lichenoid reaction (OLR) constitute clinical entities with strong but unclear etiologic relation to dental materials. The aim of this study was to evaluate a correlation between the clinical form of OLP/OLR and the number of dental metal restorations in the oral cavity thus utilizing an exposure to metal (EM) index. Material and methods The study type is experimental, and the study design is characterized as semiquantitative research that belongs to the branch of experimental research. Twenty-nine patients were chosen based on clinical (either reticular or erosive clinical forms) and histologic findings suggestive of OLP/OLR. The files of patients were retrieved from the archives of the Department of Oral Medicine/Pathology, School of Dentistry, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Greece, during the period 2009-2019. The medical history of the patients did not include any disorder or medication associated with lichenoid lesions and the measurements took place concurrently with the establishment of the diagnosis, thus no treatment for the lichen planus had been administered prior to the measurements. Quantitative measurement of the percentage of dental surfaces restored through metal restorations and correlation with the clinical and histologic findings of OLP/OLR was evaluated. The EM index was evaluated on a scale of 1-3, which corresponds to the percentage of dental surfaces restored through metal restorations. The statistical analysis was performed with the Pearson chi-square test and the significance level was set at p≤0.05. Results The EM index was measured by dividing each tooth into five surfaces (occlusal, mesial, distal, buccal, lingual), subsequently multiplying the number of available teeth with the number 5 to calculate the total number of surfaces, and then counting the number of surfaces with metal restorations - both fillings and crowns (in case of metal-ceramic crowns, the respective dental surface is taken into account only in case of macroscopically exposed metal), dividing the number of surfaces with metal restorations with the total number of surfaces and multiply by 100 so that the results take the form of percentages (%) and finally classifying the percentages into three groups: 1: 0% metal restorations, 2: 1-25% metal restorations, 3: >26% metal restorations). The percentage in female patients ranged from 0% to 100%, whereas it ranged from 0% to 60% in male patients. According to the clinical form of the lichenoid lesion, the percentage ranged from 0% to 60% in reticular lichen planus cases and from 0% to 100% in erosive lichen planus cases. There was no statistical difference between lichen planus cases, in total, and in normal oral epithelium. However, the levels of EM were marginally similar between the reticular lichen planus and the erosive lichen planus (Fisher's exact test, p = 0.056). Therefore, it may be the case that the EM index is higher in erosive lichenoid lesions. Conclusion In our study, the EM index was higher in female patients and in erosive lichenoid lesions. These findings should be tested and supported by larger samples of patients since the aforementioned Fisher's Exact Test, p = 0.056 could fall below the threshold of 0.05 if more patients were included. This is the first attempt to establish a novel approach to differentiating erosive and reticular lichen planus based on the percentage of dental surfaces with metal restorations.