SynthesisThe Journal of laryngology and otology2025
Sublingual ranulas, is it time for a new classification? A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in The Journal of laryngology and otology, 2025. 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.
- Clinical Outcomes of Polidocanol Foam Sclerotherapy in Treatment of Sublingual Ranula.International dental journal · 2026Article
- OK-432 sclerotherapy for a plunging ranula extending into the parapharyngeal space.Journal of dental sciences · 2026Article
- Plunging ranula with extension to the tongue base.Journal of dental sciences · 2026Article
- Hidden in Plain Sight: Neglected Congenital Ranula Presenting as Failure to Thrive in an Infant.Cureus · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesSublingual ranulas present diagnostic and therapeutic challenges due to their heterogenous clinical presentations. This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to synthesise treatment outcomes and proposes a new classification for this condition.
methodsFollowing PRISMA guidelines, a thorough literature search identified studies on patients with sublingual ranulas receiving medical or surgical treatment. Proportion meta-analysis compared success rates among studies using a random-effects model.
resultsForty-two studies were included, covering 686 endoral ranulas, 429 plunging ranulas, and 16 ranulas extending into the parapharyngeal space. Sublingual sialoadenectomy with or without pseudocyst wall excision showed low heterogeneity and the highest success rates. Consequently, a new classification system is proposed categorising ranulas by intraoral (Type 1), cervical (Type 2) or parapharyngeal space (Type 3) extension.
conclusionThis study confirms the role of sublingual gland resection as standard of care and highlights the need for a revised classification to improve patient outcomes.
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.