SynthesisLasers in medical science2025
Is CO2 laser effective in the surgical management of oral potentially malignant disorders? A systematic review and meta-analysis.
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 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- High-Energy Lasers in Oral Oncology: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of clinical medicine · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThis study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of carbon dioxide (CO2) lasers in the surgical management of oral potentially malignant disorders (OPMDs), lesions of the oral mucosa with a risk of malignant transformation. The research question focused on whether CO2 lasers reduce recurrence rates and postoperative pain compared to other treatment modalities.
methodsThis review was conducted in accordance with the PRISMA statements, and registered in PROSPERO (CRD42023438873). A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted by searching 12 electronic databases for articles published between 2000 and August 31, 2023. Two independent reviewers screened studies based on inclusion criteria, selecting 16 studies: 12 non-randomized controlled trials (NRCTs) and 4 randomized controlled trials (RCTs). The Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal Checklist and the RoB 2 tool were used to assess the risk of bias. Meta-analyses were performed to compare recurrence rates and postoperative pain between CO2 laser therapy and other treatment modalities.
resultsCO2 laser therapy showed a lower recurrence rate compared to other treatment modalities, with an odds ratio of 0.36 (95% CI: 0.12-1.04; Z = 1.89), though this difference was not statistically significant (p = 0.06). For postoperative pain, the standardized mean difference was - 0.16 (95% CI: -1.37 to 1.05; Z = 0.26), with no significant difference between groups.
conclusionCO2 lasers provide several advantages and hold promise for treating OPMDs. However, further research is needed to fully establish their therapeutic efficacy and explore their application in other oral lesions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40063178What 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.