The data did not

support the phenomenon of increased salivary flow resulting from mechanical stimulation of salivary glands in dyskinetic cerebral palsy. However, the findings did suggest that drooling is clinically distinct between children with spastic and dyskinetic cerebral palsy. Although increased salivary parotid flow rates in children unresponsive to submandibular botulinum toxin type A were found, the role of parotid flow in therapy failure could not be settled in the current study. Therapy failure might mainly be explained by factors that influence the intraoral management of saliva, such as head position, lip closure, and disturbed oral movements instead of biological www.selleckchem.com/CDK.html factors such as neurologic regulatory mechanisms of salivary flow. As generally discussed in the cerebral palsy literature, the rate of mental disability and dyskinesia increases as functionality decreases. Against this background, we concluded that our group represented not an average group of children with cerebral palsy, but a very severely affected group [19] and [20]. The overall percentage of children who responded (74%)

was in accordance with the findings of a former study selleckchem (70%) [7] and [21]. Although an overestimation of the effect due to the imputation method we used is possible, the mean imputation method nevertheless provided unbiased estimates in current study because the missing values met the strong assumption of being missing completely at random [22]. Earlier we suggested that in children with dyskinetic disorders, drooling might be caused by increased production of saliva resulting from constant stimulation of the parotid glands. In the present study, we were unable to demonstrate this outcome. A possible explanation could be that Lepirudin the swab method technique itself plays a role. The position of the cottons rolls limited movements of the jaw and tongue considerably (“fixed mouth”), hindering potential salivary gland stimulation in children with dyskinetic cerebral palsy during the assessments.

The increased drooling intensity in dyskinetic cerebral palsy assessed by the Drooling Quotient observation, where voluntary oral motor function was still possible (“dynamic mouth”), suggested that mechanical stimulation of the salivary glands might contribute to drooling in the dyskinetic cerebral palsy subtype. Furthermore, the children with dyskinetic cerebral palsy seemed to have better residual swallowing functions, as explained by the clear decrease of the Drooling Quotient after submandibular botulinum application. The clinical response failure was approximately 26% in our study. Because ultrasound was used, incorrect application of botulinum toxin type A would not be likely as a reason for the observed therapy failure.