ReviewDentistry journal2025
Treatments for Recurrent Aphthous Stomatitis: A Literature Review.
Review in Dentistry journal, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Role and Relevance of Warm Saline Mouth Rinses in Contemporary Dental Practice: A Narrative Review.Cureus · 2026Review
- Prevalence, risk factors, and psychosocial impact of self-reported recurrent oral ulceration among Palestinian medical and dental students: a multicenter cross-sectional study.BMC oral health · 2026Article
- Pain severity trajectory and influencing factors in children with recurrent aphthous stomatitis: a latent variable growth mixture model.Frontiers in pain research (Lausanne, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Thiol-disulfide parameters in recurrent aphthous stomatitis: A cross-sectional study.BMC oral health · 2025Article
- Deciphering the Genetic Association Between the FODMAP Diet and Recurring Oral Aphthae-The Mediating Role of Ferroptosis.Food science & nutrition · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND/
objectivesThis literature review aims to provide guidance on the treatment of recurrent aphthous stomatitis (RAS) based on studies published over the past 10 years.
methodsThis study included randomized clinical trials involving human patients from 2013 and 2023, published in any language. The trials examined both pharmacological and non-pharmacological treatments for aphthous lesions, mainly focusing on the adult population, with pain management as the primary outcome. The research was conducted using PubMed, EMBASE, and CINHAL databases.
resultsMost of the 45 analyzed studies focused on non-pharmacological therapies, which led to positive results with minimal adverse effects or contraindications, even when compared to cortisone-based treatments. Laser therapy also showed excellent results, particularly in the immediate post-treatment period. Non-pharmacological therapies appeared to offer the best risk-benefit ratio for patients suffering from RAS.
conclusionsTreatment should be individualized based on the patient's specific form of RAS, and laser therapy can be used either as a standalone treatment or as an adjunct to other treatments considered in the review.
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.