Skip to main content
. 2023 Jun 6;12(12):3874. doi: 10.3390/jcm12123874

Table 2.

First author and year of publication, PICOS information, and oral manifestation reported in the 8 articles that report atrophic glossitis or geographic tongue among the manifestations of CD.

Authors Study Design No. of
Patients/
Controls
Age
Patients/
Controls
Sex
Patients/
Controls
Diagnosis Outcome
No. (%)
Bramanti et al. (2014) [24] Cross-sectional 50/
54
7.5 ± 4.4/
8.8 ± 2.9
22M;28F
22M;32F
CD 5 (10%)/2 (3.7%) geographic tongue; 7 (14%)/1 (1.85%) atrophic glossitis
Campisi et al. (2007) [26] Case-control 197/
413
19.09 (2–75)/
(2–77)
73M;124F
163M;250F
CD 31 (16%)/1 (0.2%) atrophic glossitis; 14 (7%)/5 (1%) geographic tongue
Lähteenoja et al. (1998) [33] Cross-sectional 136/
30
46.9 ± 9.8/
47.9 ± 14.3
15M;15F
11M;19F
CD 4/1 atrophic tongue
Ludovichetti et al. (2022) [35] Retrospective
cohort
38/
38
(6 to 14) 11M;27F
12M;26F
CD 8 (21%)/1 (26%) atrophic glossitis; 7 (18.4%)/3 (7.9%) geographic tongue
Macho et al. (2019) [36] Case-control 80/
80
13.3 (6 to 18) 32M;48F
35M;45F
CD 6 (7.5%)/1 (1.3%) geographic tongue; 5 (6.3%)/0 (0%) atrophic glossitis
Nota et al. (2020) [40] Structured
questionnaire
(survey)
237 (15 to 56) 55M;182F CD 12 (5.06%) glossitis
Procaccini et al. (2007) [41] Case-control 50/
50
(3 to 25) CD 4 (8%)/1 (2%) atrophic glossitis
Zoumpoulakis et al. (2019) [11] Case-control 45/
45
10.3 ± 4.1
10.3 ± 4.05
15M;30F CD 0 (0%)/0 (0%) atrophic glossitis; 3 (6.7%)/0 (0%) geographic tongue