ArticleMedicina oral, patologia oral y cirugia bucal2020
What is the preferred concentration of ethanolamine oleate for sclerotherapy of oral vascular anomalies?
Article in Medicina oral, patologia oral y cirugia bucal, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Diode laser versus sclerotherapy: bloodless approaches in the treatment of oral pyogenic granuloma (randomised controlled clinical trial).Odontology · 2023Trial
- Minimally invasive treatment of benign oral vascular lesions: A retrospective study.Medicina oral, patologia oral y cirugia bucal · 2025Article
- Experience with 808-nm diode laser in the treatment of 47 cases of oral vascular anomalies.Brazilian oral research · 2024Article
- Evaluation of sclerotherapy of benign oral vascular lesions with monoethanolamine oleate.Clinical oral investigations · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThis study compared three different concentrations of EO (1.25%, 2.5% and 5%) for the treatment of oral vascular anomalies (OVAs). MATERIAL AND
methodsThis was a retrospective comparative analysis of patients with OVAs treated with EO. Anomalies smaller than 20 mm were included. The patients were treated with 1.25% (G1), 2.5% (G2), and 5% (G3) and clinical data were obtained. The number of sessions, the final volume and dose of EO were statistically analyzed to verify effectiveness and safety of the treatment. The different concentrations of EO were compared considering the number of sessions, the final volume and total dose of EO. Analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) was used to evaluate the influence of covariates on the outcomes. A p-value < 0.05 was considered significant.
resultsNineteen women and 11 men with a median age of 54 years were included. The OVAs were most frequent in the lip (n=14) and cheek (n=9). All lesions exhibited complete clinical healing within 28 days. Patients of G3 required fewer sessions than those of G2 (p=0.017), a lower final volume compared to the other groups (p<0.001), and a lower total dose than G1 (p<0.001). Patients of G1 used a lower total dose than G2 (p=0.003).
conclusionsThe concentration of 5% EO performed better than 1.25% and 2.5% for sclerotherapy of OVAs measuring up to 20 mm. This preliminary result should be the preferred concentration of EO to provide an effective and safe treatment of OVAs.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.