Prevention effect of low-temperature atomization inhalation for radiation induced oral mucositis in patients with head and neck cancer undergoing radiotherapy

• Main Authors: Bai XH, Chen ZM, Ma LH, He Z, Li G
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Published: Dove Medical Press 2019-05-01
• Series: Cancer Management and Research
• Subjects: low-temperature atomization; head and neck cancer; radiotherapy; radiation induced oral mucositis.
• Online Access: https://www.dovepress.com/prevention-effect-of-low-temperature-atomization-inhalation-for-radiat-peer-reviewed-article-CMAR

Xing-Hua Bai, Zi-Min Chen, Liang-Hua Ma, Zheng He, Guang LiDepartment of Radiation Oncology, The First Affiliated Hospital of China Medical University, Shenyang, People’s Republic of ChinaPurpose: To investigate the prevention effect of low-temperature atomization inhalation for radiation induced oral mucositis (OM) in patients with head and neck cancer (HNC) undergoing radiotherapy.Patients and methods: A total of 68 patients with HNC (including nasopharyngeal cancer) undergoing radiotherapy were divided into an intervention group (33 cases) and a control group (35 cases). During radiotherapy, the intervention group received low-temperature (between 4°C and 8°C) atomization inhalation; while the control group received normal temperature (between 18°C and 24°C) atomization inhalation. Atomization inhalation was performed twice a day, 20 minutes per time, using distilled water. The incidence and severity of OM was evaluated every week during radiotherapy. The comparation was made between the two groups.Results: The two groups were comparable among age, sex, Eastern Cooperative Oncology group (ECOG) score, body mass index (BMI) before radiotherapy, BMI loss during radiotherapy, original tumor site, pathological type, TNM stage, and mean oral cavity irradiated dose. There was a significant difference in the incidence of OM between the two groups (P<0.05). There were fewer patients with severe OM in the intervention group compared to the control group (P<0.05). The onset time of OM in the intervention group was delayed by about 4 days compared to that in the control group (P<0.05). Low-temperature atomization inhalation helped to avoid radiotherapy interruption in the intervention group. No patient in the intervention group suffered any adverse reaction for low-temperature atomization inhalation treatment.Conclusions: Low-temperature atomization inhalation can reduce the incidence and severity of OM, and slow down the progression process of it. It can be used as a new prevention method during radiotherapy, and should be promoted in clinical practice.Keywords: low-temperature atomization, head and neck cancer, radiotherapy, radiation induced oral mucositis