ArticleCureus2024
Super-pulsed Diode Laser in the Therapy of Inferior Alveolar Nerve Paresthesia After Mandibular Third Molar Extraction: A Case Report.
Article in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Oral paresthesia occurs when one of the nerves in the region is injured, usually the inferior alveolar and/or lingual nerve, after dental procedures such as the extraction of lower third molars. The objective of this study was to describe the case of a patient who received photobiomodulation (PBM) therapy for paresthesia of the inferior alveolar nerve (IAN) caused by the extraction of mandibular third molars. The protocol used involved a super-pulsed diode laser with dual wavelengths of 810 nm and 980 nm, 1 W, 60 seconds, 12.15 J/cm², with a spot size of 25 mm in the extraoral area. In the intraoral region, 0.3 W, 60 seconds, 46.77 J/cm², with a 7 mm tip, was applied. Before starting each PBM session, mapping of the area was performed to delineate the regions with paresthesia, and the degree of sensitivity was evaluated using a visual analog scale (VAS). On the first day, before the first laser therapy session, the VAS assessment was 7, indicating partial loss of sensitivity. After 48 hours and before the second PBM session, the patient reported a slight tingling sensation and substantial improvement in chin sensitivity, with a VAS score of 4.5. After nine sessions, the patient reported recovery of sensitivity in all affected regions (VAS = 0), with positive and normal responses to touch with a dental explorer. Within the parameters established for this clinical case, our results suggest that PBM therapy may improve the loss of sensation observed in IAN paresthesia following injury or surgical trauma.
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.