Talk:Mouth ulcer

• Palliative treatment requires reorganising.
• seems to be alot of unsubstantiated claims.

-Bouncingmolar 10:42, 13 February 2007 (UTC)Reply

Palliative treatment is gone, for all the reasons previously explained.Dr-G - Illigetimi non carborundum est. 18:33, 13 April 2007 (UTC)Reply

For some of the same reasons listed in the topic below, the information on this page is disputed as being factually incorrect. Specifcally, some of the information presented on this page directly contradicts information in the aphthous ulcer wiki page, and some of the citations do not contain evidence to prove claims made in this article (see citation 2 on the mouth ulcer page). Since a "mouth ulcer" is in fact an apthous ulcer, and the wiki page for apthous ulcer is much more concise and accurate, I recommend that the mouth ulcer page simply redirect to apthous ulcer.

I disagree. Mouth ulcer is an incomplete article. Apthous ulcer is a (fairly) complete article. Not all mouth ulcers are apthous (despite the etymology of the word) and therefore we either split all the different types into separate articles or merge all under one heading of mouth ulcer. That would be one long piece. For instance, the ulcer resultant from the degeneration of bullae in vesiculobullous diseases is different from RA ulcers clinically and histologically, but both are ulcers because they breach the integrity of the mucosa. Dr-G - Illigetimi nil carborundum est. 17:32, 31 October 2006 (UTC)Reply

Yeah, I've been thinking about the articles recently, and I think it would be a good idea to clarify the distinction between the two. Though, I have to say that I think the Aphthous ulcer article has way too much info about unverified home remedies. - Dozenist talk 21:29, 31 October 2006 (UTC)Reply

Maybe you could suggest an appropriate format for the citations to prove claims made in this article. Also I think that apthous ulcer is a variant of the umbrella term mouth ulcer. (Bouncingmolar 10:19, 13 February 2007 (UTC))Reply

• The original content of the mouth ulcer page has been relocated to aphthous ulcer as the content of the page was predominantly about canker sores/ aphthous ulcers and not about mouth ulcers in general.
  • the new mouth ulcer page in this location is a heavily modified version of the original(still found at aphthous ulcer). This page now contains more information about mouth ulcers of a variety of other causes and paints a more general overview of mouth ulcers opposed to the original which focussed on apthous ulcers alone.
• The original talk page for mouth ulcer is now also located as the talk page for aphthous ulcer as of 18 july 2006
• Recurrent aphthous stomatitis has been merged with the aphthous ulcer page(the original 'mouth ulcer' page) as requested. (see the requests on the aphthous ulcer talk page)

(Bouncingmolar 16:04, 18 July 2006 (UTC))Reply

Canker sore redicrects to this page (Mouth ulcer). Canker sore should redirect to apthous ulcer. However, I agree the apthous ulcer should be mrged with this article. ~ UBeR 18:19, 18 November 2006 (UTC)Reply

I agree it seems like this page is quite redundant with Aphthous_ulcer -- merging the two or somehow differentiating the scope of each might help. Rogerdpack (talk) 15:50, 26 April 2009 (UTC)Reply

• There have been some fairly heavy modification (with a lot of time spent, although this is not a factor if the information is incorrect) of this page including some injection of new information about ulcer types including references from oral pathology texts. The original content is mirrored on aphthous ulcer
• It has been suggested to me by one user so far that maybe this page should be reverted until a consensus has been reached, and the aphthous ulcer removed. Do other people feel that this is the case? Clearly I think that the mouth ulcer page is an improvement because it now describes mouth ulcers as a whole. Furthermore I think that aphthous ulcers are merely a sub category of Mouth Ulcers, along with many other ulcer causing vectors. Are there other opinions? if so maybe i was a little bit hasty, please comment.(Bouncingmolar 07:37, 19 July 2006 (UTC))Reply
• My addition on electric toothbrushes being a prevention has been quickly excised by a certain Dr G. Now whilst I might agree that there is no statistically significant studies on this, members of my family have suffered from mouth ulcers all our lives. Switching to an electric toothbrush was the most significant prevention that we have all come across. My dentist recommended it. And while a sample of 5 with 100% success rate is not a statistically significant double blind study - it is very useful information to have for the sufferer out there. And the logic is obvious. Use a manual toothbrush and accidently hit it hard into the gum. Three days later there will be a painful ulcer (for those of us who get them). Use an electric toothbrush and you don't ever hit it into the gum - hence less ulcers. So I can accept that maybe my wording could be changed but I think it is a very useful piece of information for the sufferer out there who will come to this page for solutions. The other brilliant thing is Kenalog in Orabase which my doctor recommended. Those two things now prevent me suffering from mouth ulcers any more.

To be honest with you, it may be true that you find the frequency of ulceration decreasing over time when you use an electric toothbrush, but that is not due in any part to differences between the electric toothbrush and the manual toothbrush, but differences in how you use them. This website is not an advice page, it is an information page. I will be editing the entire palliative care section to remove any uncited claims or treatments. Palliative care is not treatment. It is what is used when there is no effective treatment, ie in order to reduce symptoms experienced by the patient. So effective treatments do not belong in this section. Because this is not an advice website (no website should be in my opinion, medical or dental advice should be obtained from a trained diagnostician), treatments that are anecdotally successful do not belong here. The idea that trauma triggers aphthous ulceration is sound, but your suggestion does not belong in the palliative care section, but the treatment section (possibly under preventive heading). There may be studies to back this up. Dr-G - Illigetimi non carborundum est. 00:37, 19 February 2007 (UTC)Reply

i've had little 'ulcers' or whatever in the past and they always look like the one i just got. a friend says to blame stress. here's a pic, i'll release it GFDL or whatever if you're interested (i do have a much larger version but this is just cropped, so you're not losing any detail of the actual sore): http://ibulk.net/ulcer.jpg --TIB (talk) 00:40, 17 January 2007 (UTC)Reply

Please keep in mind that if you want real medical advice, you need to see a doctor. Most doctors will be hesitant to try to diagnose anything over the internet. - Dozenist talk 01:54, 17 January 2007 (UTC)Reply

I've always known of these as mouth blisters, as well as the rest of my family. I wonder where that name started. SadanYagci 21:31, 17 January 2007 (UTC)Reply

I can see how some ulcers get mistaken. If a gland get blocked it'll swell up like a blister and often, if these swellings are popped, they'll turn into ulcers. Abigsmurf 00:31, 29 May 2007 (UTC)Reply

From Prevention:

Quantities around 1ml are more than sufficient.

1ml seems a ridiculously small amount of mouthwash to use, I find it hard to believe it would have any effect. A quick google shows people using 20ml -> 100ml. Where did the 1ml figure come from? Could someone remove this if there's nothing to back it up? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.41.41.148 (talk) 18:27, 15 December 2007 (UTC)Reply

The section indicates that a small vessel should be used to contain the solution and, presumably, contain it against the site of injury. If this is the case, and the solution were prevented from mixing with saliva, concentrations would exceed what could normally be achieved with a much larger dose. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.161.116.251 (talk) 22:25, 6 October 2010 (UTC)Reply

Edited the bit about gels in the treatment section:

"Some people benefit from using the over-the-counter topical gel Bonjela, which contains choline salicylate -- choline salicylate is a local analgesic that helps to reduce the pain and inflammation associated with oral ulcers."

read too much like an advert to me, so I edited it to include the possibilities of other gels that might not contain the same substances. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.29.235.234 (talk) 14:45, 14 January 2008 (UTC)Reply

'Also, putting baking soda directly on the sore and taking l-lysine herb has been shown to help with healing and pain.' This is unsourced. I tried it, and it BUrnnnneeeddd!!!! Badly. Someone playing a TRICK I feel. >.> <.< 58.104.146.164 (talk) 04:22, 25 January 2008 (UTC)Reply

I was always told that an effective alternative to bonjela is directly applying salt to the ulcer. This hurts more than my arthritis, but does seem to help. pcr^talk 22:29, 9 October 2008 (UTC)Reply

I was told by my doctor to press a soluable asprin against the ulcer as aspirin is an anti-infmatory drug. This seems to help stop the pain of the ulcer and it works for me. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.147.234.246 (talk) 18:37, 15 October 2008 (UTC)Reply

Don't hold aspirin tablet in the mouth, you will get a chemical burn. Unrelated, please don't misuse wikipedia talkpages, they are about the content and ways to improve the article not general discussions about the topic...lesion (talk)

I've found that consumption of a common food preservative (Sodium Benzoate aka E211) and it's close allies (e.g. Benzoic Acid aka E210) will cause me to develop mouth ulcers around two days after exposure; continued exposure leads to an increase in both numbers and severity of ulcers. This also goes for my father and brother, but not my mother; so I suspect there may be a genetic component to this effect too. If you're suffering, try an elimination diet; pay particular attention to mouthwashes and soft drinks. Quickos (talk) 15:44, 16 August 2008 (UTC)Reply

== INTOLLORANCE TRUST ME; try Weleda 'Medicinal gargle. 9 drops in very small amount of water 5mm in botton of narrow glass and neat as a imediate pain relief (does sting) but well worth the short moment of pain. Gargle straight after tomatoes and can help stop one starting. AVOID TOMATOES, in fact since i have completely avioded them even sauces in curries etc. Yes some tooth pastes seem to be bad, but they do not cause them. If I have even a small bit of Tomato say in a burger king wopper= mouth ulcer by the end of the day. THE DIFFERANCE with using Weleda Gargle is it will 8 times out of ten eighter not develope at all or stay small and be gone in 3 days. AND most importantly

stop the cycle of as soon as one heals another appears. All you sufferers please please do your self a favour. try this stuff it works on tounge ulcers for me also. they are definately stress related/tired . ==

I suffered for years and years with several ulcers at once some growing to the size of your little fingernail. All because I used Bonjela which is THE WORST POSSIBLE TREATMENT.They came back with vengence. OMG Iwish I knew of Weleda back then. health shops sell it. A Homeopath recommeded it. Caledula did nothing but make them angry just like any other trament i tried. Best of luck. please edit this thread if you try it to let us know how you got on.

There is no mention whatsoever of cases when an ulcer would appear on the tongue. LaughingSkull (talk) 02:20, 27 November 2009 (UTC)Reply

In the "TREATMENT" Section, some genius has suggested that rubbing Salt or Garlic can help cure mouth ulcers. And obviously thre are no citations to This is obviously a Joke, because rubbing salt or garlic is obviously going to exacerbate the lesion as one will heavy dehydrate the sorrounding and the other is a very pungent substance. I suggest this be removed with immeidate effect. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ashish.jagyasi (talk • contribs) 10:46, 19 January 2012 (UTC)Reply

The cause "Smoking cessation" is listed under trauma, should it not be listed under Immune system? Mootros (talk) 07:30, 13 September 2012 (UTC)Reply

as far as I am aware, smoking cessation is associated with specifically the onset of recurrent aphthous stomatitis rather than a cause of mouth ulcers generally. I moved mention of smoking cessation to the RAS section. lesion (talk) 08:24, 27 December 2012 (UTC)Reply

For the above reason I reworked this article to be a discussion of oral ulceration generally, which is a much wider topic than RAS. Also, i had to remove the following references and associated text because either they were primary or not of an acceptable quality for a medical page:

• ^ a b c "Mouth ulcers". North East Valley Division of General Practice. Retrieved 2006-06-18. link broken
• ^ a b Study on 10,000 people suffering from mouth ulcers, March 2010. primary source, questionable quality as not published in peer review journal
• ^ "Discover our study on mouth ulcers". Aftazen.co.uk. Retrieved 2012-06-04. same primary source as above
• ^ a b T. Axéll, V. Henricsson (1985). "The occurrence of recurrent aphthous ulcers in an adult Swedish population". Acta Odontologica Scandinavica. primary source
• ^ Herlof, Bente Brokstad; Barkvoll, Pål (1996). "The effect of two toothpaste detergents on the frequency of recurrent aphthous ulcers". Acta Odontologica Scandinavica 54 (3): 150–153. doi:10.3109/00016359609003515. PMID 8811135.primary source
• ^ Ussher M, West R, Steptoe A, McEwen A (March 2003). "Increase in common cold symptoms and mouth ulcers following smoking cessation". Tobacco Control 12 (1): 86–8. doi:10.1136/tc.12.1.86. PMC 1759110. PMID 12612369. primary source
• ^ McRobbie H, Hajek P, Gillison F (August 2004). "The relationship between smoking cessation and mouth ulcers". Nicotine & Tobacco Research 6 (4): 655–9. doi:10.1080/14622200410001734012. PMID 15370162.primary source
• ^ Lesion-directed dry dosage forms of antibacterial agents for the treatment of acute mucosal infections of the oral cavity, US Patent Office Full-Text and Image Database, 19 June 2001.patent?
• Dtsch Med Wochenschr. 1993 Apr 2;118(13):451-6. [Mercury sensitization in amalgam fillings. Assessment from a dermatologic viewpoint]. [Article in German] Brehler R, Panzer B, Forck G, Bertram HP primary source

Also, some stuff is just plain wrong, herpes simplex does not cause recurrent herpetiforme ulceration.

lesion (talk) 07:35, 27 December 2012 (UTC)Reply

Is an ulcer left by rupture of a herpetic vesicle on the lips really considered as oral ulceration? None of the textbooks include this in the topic.lesion (talk) 22:43, 25 January 2013 (UTC)Reply

I have no particular reason to doubt the statements about oral electrical burns, but another editor does. The following is a quotation from the Toon reference: As mentioned, oral burns are common following the frequent incidence of children inserting a live electrical cord into the mouth. Contracture of the oral commissures may result, severely limiting the motion of the patient's mouth. These oral burns can extend entirely through the lip and oral mucosa and if the necrotic zone extends into the labial artery, commonly 10-14 days after the burn, result in severe bleeding. Parents should be warned of this risk and instructed on methods of occluding the vessel.^[1] Please don't revert again unless you have a reason better than "no" (the most pathetic edit summary I've seen in a while). -- Scray (talk) 05:31, 12 May 2013 (UTC)Reply

thank you for presenting the full material from the source which was being blatantly misrepresented as claiming that electrical mouth burns were common, rather than what the source says that they are common in a very limited circumstance. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 05:50, 12 May 2013 (UTC)Reply

Your most recent removal did not include the word "common" or any suggestion thereof. -- Scray (talk) 11:41, 12 May 2013 (UTC)Reply

"No" =D hilarious. Just to add that the original source that supported that content used the words "fairly common", so it was neither "unsourced hoax" or misrepresentation of the source. Suggest red pen is trolling (again)...but look they actually didn't delete any content in their last edit! Not quite actually adding content yet, but baby steps maybe. Lesion (talk) 13:18, 12 May 2013 (UTC)Reply

tossing in a source and saying "everything in this section is verified by this source" is not a response that meets the policy of Verification which requires specific inline citations. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 15:28, 12 May 2013 (UTC)Reply

What has happened here is that you decided to randomly delete content without properly reading it to see the citation, and you are looking to justify your behavior after the event, changing your reasons from initially stating that it was an "unsourced hoax" (despite source in text which you read/don't bother to check), then stating that the content did not accurately reflect the source. How may I ask can something not accurately represent a source and be unsourced at the same time? Now you are trying to say that there was a problem with the inline citation, and linking to your favorite policy (possibly the only policy you have read/choose to follow). There is no requirement for inline citation of every sentence, or even every paragraph. Since this section was short, there is no problem with the citation the way it was. Stop trolling. Lesion (talk) 18:53, 12 May 2013 (UTC)Reply

I will fully and unapologetically stand by the position that this version without claims that biting through electrical cords is common is a better version than this version stating "Electrical burns in the mouth are fairly common. ". The article now contains information that accurately reflects a source, and so now unless you have additional discussion about content, we are done here. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 19:10, 12 May 2013 (UTC)Reply

This is one way this could have been done:

• read the section fully
• raise the issue politely on the talk page
• listen to the reasoning of other editors
• work constructively towards a solution (if needed - in this case the content was not unsourced, or nonrepresentative of the source, or breaking any inline citation guideline, and therefore arguably no solution was required)

And here's another way:

• delete content without reading it properly
• revert the changes with no counter argument, instead leaving "no" as an edit summary
• speak rudely to other editors on the talk pages when someone else raises the issue
• change your reasons twice for behavior
• fail to apologize when in the wrong and acting out, and even act as if you have contributed somehow and improved the article
• unnecessary drama and a waste of time all round. Lesion (talk) 22:12, 12 May 2013 (UTC)Reply

Occurred to me that it would be good to have a section on how mouth ulcers heal, on the cellular level. Or maybe this would be better on the oral mucosa page. Lesion (talk) 15:49, 6 July 2013 (UTC)Reply

 

 

A recent edit removed the image. I think that the differentiation between a malignant ulcer and benign causes of oral ulceration is one of the most important aspects of this topic. The best way to describe something is with a picture rather than words alone. Oral cancer usually presents late, because people have ignored a "mouth ulcer" for many weeks hoping it will go away. This gives oral cancer a poor prognosis because of the lack of awareness, and by the time the person goes to see a health care professional, the tumor is large and may have spread to the lymph nodes in the neck. I did have a look through all the pictures of malignant ulcer we had available a while ago, because someone requested more pictures on the oral cancer page. Arguably, the following image is more typical of a malignant ulcer, both in terms of appearance and site, however the image we have currently for this page excellently shows the classically described rolled margin, and it is almost on the side of the tongue so it is not in an atypical site... Lesion (talk) 10:49, 28 July 2013 (UTC)Reply

I question the recent addition of the material about cloves as a treatment. The edit summary (from an anonymous editor) talks about personal experience, yet the added material seems to say it is from one of the references. I'm betting that it was just stuck in the middle of some properly referenced material, and that it really belongs after the reference, and is maybe original research. Lou Sander (talk) 02:07, 19 August 2014 (UTC)Reply

Agree, and I have reverted the edit which added cloves and also the previous edit which also added unreferenced material to the treatment section. 188.30.205.229 (talk) 05:51, 19 August 2014 (UTC)Reply

I was searching for causes for mouth ulcers and found this article much more better than [NIH http://www.nhs.uk/Conditions/Mouth-ulcer/Pages/Introduction.aspx] article. Thanks a lot for creating such an exhaustive article. I would like to thank to all the contributors of this article. -- Abhijeet Safai (talk) 06:53, 5 April 2017 (UTC)Reply

I see BedrockPerson and 58.7.108.178/Matthew Ferguson 57 have been engaging in an edit war over adding BedrockPerson's photo of his own mouth. I can't see that the image is needed since it's highly similar to the image above it, and there is no shortage of images in the article. AntiVan (talk) 02:32, 18 June 2017 (UTC)Reply

I reverted once, that does not constitute edit war. Agree image not needed. Matthew Ferguson (talk) 08:54, 18 June 2017 (UTC)Reply

Welp, that's a bold faced lie. You reverted not once, not twice, not three times, not four times, but five times. Also, the first three reverts were within 24 hours of each other, which literally constitutes the entire definition of an edit war. So, let's not bullshit anyone here. BedrockPerson (talk) 19:05, 18 June 2017 (UTC)Reply

You are attributing IP edits to me. At the time I stated the above I had made only one revert. There is no need for abusive language. Matthew Ferguson (talk) 22:03, 18 June 2017 (UTC)Reply

Yep, fair point Matthew, that's my bad assumption. Sorry. AntiVan (talk) 23:02, 18 June 2017 (UTC)Reply

Ah, so you are in fact not the same user. My mistake then, I was operating on AntiVan's words and nothing else. BedrockPerson (talk) 17:17, 21 June 2017 (UTC)Reply

 

This image is problematic. It does not correspond to descriptions of the pathophysiology of mouth ulcers that I have seen. Please provide reliable references. Matthew Ferguson (talk) 21:22, 19 June 2017 (UTC)Reply

@Matthew Ferguson 57: Done. BedrockPerson (talk) 22:03, 19 June 2017 (UTC)Reply

• [1]
• [2]

Neither of these sources contain any diagram, and they do not seem to support several aspects of the diagram. I believe this diagram is too inaccurate and has been drawn together partly with original research. Having said this, the aphthous stomatitis article might benefit from a histopathology type diagram, but one more closely based on a diagram provided by a reliable source such as a pathology textbook. Given there are so many different types of mouth ulcer with different etiologies, I feel a generic diagram beyond what is already available in the definition section ([3]) is not helpful.

Specific issues with diagram:

• unclear whether describing an ulcer of recurrent aphthous stomatitis or traumatic ulceration. "traumatised area" suggests this is supposed to refer to a traumatic ulcer. There are many identified triggers for aphthous ulceration beyond trauma.
• The section described as "prodromal phase" is misleading. A prodrome is symptoms before any clinically detectable signs. I.e. if there is already inflammation / erythema visible then it can no longer be described as a prodromal phase.
• The "pre-ulcerative phase" already seems to depict ulceration by definition as there is a breach of the epithlium. As far as I'm aware, inflammation is mainly confined to the layers beneath the epithelium, as epithelium is avascular (some immune cells may migrate out) yet this diagram identifies inflammation in the epithelium.
• while necrotic tissue is contained within an ulcerative lesion, it is not accurate to say there is blood and bacteria. Please see definition of what an ulcer is, many will not penetrate deeply enough into the tissues to involve blood vessels. I note that the sources do not support this either, although it does state that certain types of ulcer may resemble a blood filled blister such as vesiculobullous conditions. No doubt oral bacteria will coat the surface of the lesion same as all other oral mucosal surfaces in the mouth.
• the diagram annotated as "healthy tissue fills and envelops ulcer" is also questionable. As far as I'm aware epithelium will regenerate from the deeper layers near the basement membrane.
• "remission" in the context of aphthous stomatitis refers to a period without any ulcers. It does not define healing of an individual lesion site.

I have informed WT:MED for more opinions on this issue, kindly do not re-add this contentious diagram until there is a clear consensus to do so. Many thanks, Matthew Ferguson (talk) 09:36, 20 June 2017 (UTC)Reply

Maybe a textbook on pathophysiology would have details? But yes need a better reference than a small primary source. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 06:34, 18 July 2017 (UTC)Reply

the abbreviation RAS is used here without being introduced. could someone who knows what it is kindly add the definition and link? 108.14.251.104 (talk) 13:41, 26 March 2023 (UTC)Reply

"Cancer sore" redirects to this article now; does this term actually refer to mouth ulcers instead of sores that are caused by cancer? Jarble (talk) 22:37, 28 March 2023 (UTC)Reply