Background: Oxidative stress is involved in oral lichen planus (OLP) pathogenesis; meanwhile anthocyanins are natural antioxidants present in grapes skin. Objectives: The aim of this research was to verify the utility of anthocyanins, extracted from grapes skin, for the local treatment of oral lichen planus and to compare it with clobetasol propionate- neomycin -nystatin cream (CP-NN). Study Design: Prospective, non-randomized study, with control group. Fifty-two patients with OLP were included. We divided patients into two categories: erosive oral lichen planus (EOLP) and non erosive oral lichen planus (NEOLP). 38 had EOLP (17 cases and 21 controls) and 14 presented NEOLP types (9 cases and 5 controls).Cases received local treatment with anthocyanins from grapes and controls, were treated with CP-NN. The clinical evolution of patients was followed up during six months. Results: The patients had a therapeutic response with anthocyanins. This was better than CP-NN treatment for patients with EOLP, in improving the involvement score of the oral mucosa and in the morphometric study of the affected areas. In EOLP there were no statistically significant differences in: therapeutic response time, the evolution of pain, or the relapse rate between the two groups. With respect to the treatment of NEOLP there was improved pain relief in the group treated with anthocyanins. This was not observed with CP-NN. The resting analized variables showed no significant difference with both treatments. Conclusions: OLP has a favorable response to local treatment with anthocyanins from grapes. We found an equal to or better response than with CP-NN treatment. Many of our patients have systemic diseases, which may contraindicate the use of steroids. With regard to this particular group, the use of this natural antioxidant present in the diet is considered advantageous. Key words:Anthocyanins, antioxidants, chemoprevention, morphometry, oral lichen, oxidative stress.

No abstract

Quinoa is consumed as a seed, flour, expanded, sprout (germinated) and activated (hydrated). The objective of this work was to determine the nutritional composition of the different preparations. The same batch of quinoa seeds was processed as flour, expanded, hydrated and germinated. It showed that there is a statistically significant difference of nutrients between all groups. For proteins, it varies from 12.78 ± 0.02 g/100 g in whole seed to 5.25 ± 0.01 g/100 g in the hydrated seed. In total fats, it varies from 7.80 ± 0.02 g/100 g in flour to 0.72 ± 0.01 g/100 g in sprouts. For fiber, the germinated quinoa provides the highest content (23.50 ± 0.01 g/100 g), whereas the hydrated quinoa the lowest content (8.71 ± 0.02 g/100 g). This shows how different preparations influence the nutritional contribution of quinoa. With this information, one can recommend different types of preparations depending on the type of nutrient that is wanted for consumption.