Clinical problems and outcome indicators in the expert consensus determined by the Delphi method of 5-aminolevulinic acid photodynamic therapy for the treatment of oral potential malignant diseases

Abstract

Objective To determine the clinical problems and outcome indicators that need to be included in the expert consensus of 5-aminolevulinic acid (ALA) photodynamic therapy in the treatment of oral potential malignant diseases. Methods Based on the relevant literature, the clinical problems and outcome indicators were drafted during the meeting. The Delphi method was used for expert consultation and expert opinion collection. The average and standard deviation of the voting results were calculated to determine the importance of the indicators, and the positive coefficient, variation coefficient and coordination coefficient were calculated for quality control. Results In the first round of the Delphi method, 12 outcome indicators (the main reference elements include photon integral flux, power density, illumination time, and spot diameter were identified; the specific parameters are photon integral flux of 100 J/cm2 and power density of 100-600 mW/cm2. A diode laser of (630 ± 5) nm wavelength should be chosen. The analgesic regimen is local anesthesia supplemented by hypothermia and intermittent laser irradiation before treatment. Lesions with hyperkeratotic require pretreatment. The concentration of ALA administered was set at 20%. Eight clinical problems (main reference elements of photodynamic irradiation dose, specific parameters, choice of light source, evaluation criteria of efficacy, prevention of adverse effects, dosing concentration, whether oral potentially malignant diseases with hyperkeratosis should be pretreated, administration of photosensitizers) were included according to the literature and expert discussion. In the second round, 89 experts completed the questionnaire and gave very important evaluations of 9 outcome indicators (the main reference elements included photon integral flux, power density and illumination time; the specific parameters were a photon integral flux of 100 J/cm 2 and a power density of 100-600 mW/cm2). A diode laser of (630 ± 5)nm wavelength should be chosen. The concentration of ALA administered was set at 20%. Six clinical problems (main reference elements of photodynamic irradiation dose, specific parameters, choice of light source, evaluation criteria of efficacy, dosing concentration, administration of photosensitizers), and the remaining 3 were given important evaluations, with good consistency. Conclusion In this study, the irradiation dose, mode of administration and concentration, evaluation criteria of efficacy, prevention of adverse effects and pretreatment regimen of ALA photodynamic therapy for oral potentially malignant diseases determined by the Delphi method had good agreement among experts.

Keywords

• delphi method，
• 5-aminolevulinic acid photodynamic therapy，
• active oxygen，
• free radicals，
• potential malignant oral diseases，
• irradiation dose，
• efficacy evaluation，
• adverse reactions，