SynthesisLasers in medical science2025
Clinical efficacy of lasers in the management of recurrent aphthous ulcers of oral cavity: a systematic review of randomized control trials.
Synthesis in Lasers in medical science, 2025. 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.
- Clinical Efficacy and Safety of Photobiomodulation Therapy for Orofacial Conditions in Older Adults: A Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials.Dentistry journal · 2026Review
- Photobiomodulation in the management of oral lesions: a targeted, evidence-based approach.Brazilian oral research · 2026Review
- A comprehensive review on advancements in laser-assisted dental treatments: focus on minimally invasive techniques and clinical outcomes.Lasers in medical science · 2025Review
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
Recurrent aphthous stomatitis (RAS) is one of mankind's most common diseases with a nonspecific etiology. Lasers are gaining traction in dentistry due to their remarkable effects on pain reduction. Their convenience and lack of side effects have made them an attractive alternative to conventional interventions. This systematic review aims to summarize the current evidence on the efficacy of lasers in managing recurrent aphthous ulcers. This systematic review was performed according to PRISMA guidelines. The databases PubMed, Scopus, and EBSCOHost were electronically queried to retrieve trials published until July 2024 using the appropriate keywords. The outcomes evaluated include pain reduction, healing duration, and lesion size reduction. The bias assessment was conducted using the Revised Cochrane risk-of-bias method designed explicitly for randomized trials (Protocol Registration No: INPLASY2024110096). After evaluating the eligibility of 311 articles, 24 trials were included in the final review. Of 24 trials, data from 16 trials demonstrated that laser therapy is more efficacious in pain reduction than the control regardless of its power. Eleven of the included articles showed that low-level laser therapy had a shorter healing time than the control group. Six trials presented data indicating that low-level laser therapy results in a more significant reduction in ulcer diameter. Current evidence show that low-level as well as CO2 laser treatment are superior to conventional therapy for pain management in RAS. Future research should focus on determining the ideal laser treatment settings by standardizing parameters and outcome measurements to achieve maximum pain reduction and healing in RAS.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39870970What 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.