Home About us Editorial board Ahead of print Current issue Archives Submit article Instructions Subscribe Search Contacts Login 
  • Users Online: 570
  • Home
  • Print this page
  • Email this page
Year : 2020  |  Volume : 32  |  Issue : 3  |  Page : 253-258

Efficacy of toluidine blue, lugol's iodine and acetic acid for detecting oral lesions of Leukoplakia and erosive lichen planus – A cross-sectional study

1 Department of Oral Medicine and Radiology, Indira Gandhi Institute of Dental Sciences, Sri Balaji Vidyapeeth, Puducherry, India
2 Department of Oral Medicine and Radiology, Government Dental College, Kottayam, Kerala, India
3 Department of Oral Medicine and Radiology, Rajah Muthiah Dental College, Annamalai University, Chidambaram, Tamil Nadu, India
4 Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery and Diagnostic Sciences College of Dentistry, Jouf University, Sakakah, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA), Kingdom of Saudi Arabia
5 Kiruthic Dental Care, Tanjavur, Tamil Nadu, India

Correspondence Address:
Dr. Sivasankari Thirunavukarasu
Indira Gandhi Institute of Dental Sciences, Sri Balaji Vidyapeeth (Deemed-to-be-University), Puducherry
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None

DOI: 10.4103/jiaomr.jiaomr_22_20

Rights and Permissions

Background and Objectives: Early detection and treatment of oral cancer will significantly improve the survival rate and prognosis of the patients. Adjunctive diagnostic aids such as vital staining have been developed to supplement clinical examination and improve the diagnosis. The current study was conducted to evaluate the diagnostic efficacy of acetic acid (2%) (AA), lugol's iodine (3% dilution) (LIS), and toluidine blue (1%) (TBS) in oral leukoplakia (OL) and erosive variant of oral lichen planus (OLP). Materials and Methods: A hospital-based, cross-sectional study was conducted with 30 randomly selected subjects having clinically proven cases of OL and erosive OLP. Every patient underwent AA, LIS, and TBS application to their oral lesions in a sequential manner. Subsequently, clinical and histopathologic diagnosis was compared with staining results of each. Cases which were diagnosed as epithelial hyperplasia were considered as a control group. Data are presented in numbers and percentages. Chi-square test was used to compare between TBS, LIS and AA. Diagnostic efficiency and reliability was calculated by sensitivity and specificity test in terms of its utility in predicting the dysplastic nature of the lesion. Results: Sensitivity of both TBS and LIS staining was calculated as 90.48% whereas the specificity of the former test was 22.22% and latter was 11.11%. AA test showed a sensitivity of 57.14% and specificity of 33.33%. Multiple comparisons of staining with three agents and the histopathologic variants did not show any statistically significant difference. Conclusion: TBS and LIS staining showed high sensitivity in diagnosing OL and erosive OLP compared to AA. The specificity of all three modalities used was low.

Print this article     Email this article
 Next article
 Previous article
 Table of Contents

 Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
 Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 Email Alert *
 Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)

 Article Access Statistics
    PDF Downloaded45    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal