ArticleJournal of research in medical sciences : the official journal of Isfahan University of Medical Sciences2020
Penicillin in oral aphthosis, new insight for an old drug: A randomized, double-blind, controlled clinical trial.
Article in Journal of research in medical sciences : the official journal of Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Treatments for Recurrent Aphthous Stomatitis: A Literature Review.Dentistry journal · 2025Review
- Natural and Synthetic Drugs Approached for the Treatment of Recurrent Aphthous Stomatitis Over the Last Decade.Drug design, development and therapy · 2024Review
- Efficacy of Topical Intervention for Recurrent Aphthous Stomatitis: A Network Meta-Analysis.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundOral aphthosis is a painful ulceration of mucus membranes characterized by round or oval lesions with central necrosis and erythematous haloes. Due to unknown etiology, treatment is highly controversial and based mainly on individual experience. The aim of this study was to investigate the safety and efficacy of topical penicillin 6.3.3 for the treatment of recurrent aphthous stomatitis. MATERIALS AND
methodsThis randomized, double-blind, controlled clinical trial was done in Shahid Sadoughi Hospital Clinic in Yazd (2011-2012). Fifty patients aged 15-45 with recurrent oral aphthosis were randomly divided into two groups. After obtaining informed consents, patients in the case and control groups were treated (four times/day for a week), respectively, by topical penicillin 6.3.3 powder and placebo in similar vial. The patients who had acute-onset oral aphthae (≤48 h of appearance) with diameter ≥5 mm were included. History of sensitivity to β-lactam antibiotics and cephalosporin; spontaneous recovery during <5 days in previous episodes; concurrent systemic, infectious, or any autoimmune disorders; history of taking drugs (local or systemic) from 2 weeks prior to presentation; alcohol or drug abuse; smoking cigarette or tobacco; and poor compliance were exclusion criteria. Patients were examined in days 0, 3, 6, and 8. The main outcome measure was reduction in the median pain. Burning, pain, erythema, and inflammation were recorded as complications.
resultsOf 25 patients receiving penicillin, 13 were female and 12 were male. Regarding the pain score (mean difference = 1.6 vs. 0.88,
conclusionOur study showed a dramatic response to topical penicillin with respect to placebo. Hence, it seems that penicillin could be a safe and effective option in managing oral aphthosis.
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.