2016
DOI: 10.15430/jcp.2016.21.1.55
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Epidemiology of Oral Lichen Planus in a Cohort of South Indian Population: A Retrospective Study

Abstract: Background:Oral lichen planus (OLP) is an immune-mediated potentially malignant disorder of the oral cavity. Dysplastic OLP has an altered cytogenic profile and can progress into oral squamous cell carcinoma. The epidemiology of OLP is well-described in several relatively large series from various geographic locations, whereas such series from southern India is rare. The aim of the present study was to determine the epidemiology of OLP in a cohort of South Indian population.Methods:All the case data records of… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

4
43
1
1

Year Published

2017
2017
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 53 publications
(49 citation statements)
references
References 17 publications
4
43
1
1
Order By: Relevance
“…The prevalence of this condition among our participants falls within the expected rate. Similar to other studies, we found a positive correlation of lichen planus with older females . Moreover, in the present study, lichen planus was more commonly seen in patients with systemic diseases, a finding which supports previous reports that suggested a positive association between lichen planus and systemic diseases …”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 93%
“…The prevalence of this condition among our participants falls within the expected rate. Similar to other studies, we found a positive correlation of lichen planus with older females . Moreover, in the present study, lichen planus was more commonly seen in patients with systemic diseases, a finding which supports previous reports that suggested a positive association between lichen planus and systemic diseases …”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 93%
“…After title/abstract screening, 4324 papers were selected for abstract evaluation. Of these, 92 studies were included in the final analysis . Fourty‐six reports were on LP, 5 on OLL, 28 on LE, 8 on OE, 4 on OSF, and 11 on PVL (all the studies taken for every subgroup sum up to a figure higher than 92 because some studies focused on more than one OPMD).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…read the 43 papers in full‐length and identified 21 articles for the final data extraction: 18 being retrospective and three being prospective in nature. A summary of the full‐length articles excluded (Bajaj, Khoso, Devrajani, Matlani, & Lohana, ; Bornstein et al, ; Brown, Bottomley, Puente, & Lavigne, ; Brzak et al, ; Budimir et al, ; Casparis et al, ; Chainani‐Wu, Silverman, Lozada‐Nur, Mayer, & Watson, ; Ingafou, Leao, Porter, & Scully, ; Irani, Esfahani, & Ghorbani, ; Jaafari‐Ashkavandi, Mardani, Pardis, & Amanpour, ; Kövesi & BĂĄnĂłczy, ; Murti et al, ; Pakfetrat, Javadzadeh‐Bolouri, Basir‐Shabestari, & Falaki, ; Rajentheran, McLean, Kelly, Reed, & Nolan, ; Rimkevičius, AleksejĆ«nienė, PĆ«rienė, Ć einin, & Rastenienė, ; Rödström, Jontell, Mattsson, & Holmberg, ; Roosaar, Yin, Sandborgh‐Englund, NyrĂ©n, & AxĂ©ll, ; Thongprasom et al, ; van der Meij, Schepman, & van der Waal, ; Varghese et al, ; Wang et al, ; Warnakulasuriya et al, ), and the reasons for their exclusion can be obtained electronically (Supporting Information Table ).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%