SynthesisEvidence-based dentistry2025
Efficacy of intralesional platelet-rich plasma versus intralesional corticosteroids in the management oral lichen planus: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials using random effects and weighted least square methods.
Synthesis in Evidence-based dentistry, 2025. 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimThis systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to compare the efficacy of intralesional platelet-rich plasma and intralesional steroids in managing oral lichen planus, focusing on pain and lesion size reduction. METHODOLOGY: A systematic search of MEDLINE (via PubMed), Web of Science, Scopus, and Embase was conducted up to May 30, 2024, to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the efficacy of intralesional platelet-rich plasma (PRP) and intralesional steroids in managing oral lichen planus (OLP). The study adhered to a predefined PICOS framework: (P) adults diagnosed with OLP, (I) PRP application, (C) steroid application, (O) outcomes related to pain reduction and lesion size, and (S) RCTs. The analysis utilized both random-effects and Weighted Least Squares (WLS) models to account for heterogeneity and assess publication bias.
resultsSeven articles met the eligibility criteria, of which six were included in the meta-analysis, encompassing 141 participants. While the analysis was limited by a small sample size, significant heterogeneity, and a lack of long-term follow-up, analysis with random-effects and WLS model provided a robust comparative evaluation of PRP and steroids for OLP treatment. Pain Reduction: The pooled effect size was -0.34 (95% CI: -0.94 to 0.27; p = 0.274), indicating a moderate, non-significant preference for steroids over PRP. Moderate to high heterogeneity (I² = 68.516%) suggested substantial variability in effect sizes. Lesion Size Reduction: The pooled effect size was -0.10 (95% CI: -0.58 to 0.39; p = 0.697), favoring PRP slightly but without statistical significance. Low to moderate heterogeneity (I² = 31.42%) was observed.
conclusionPRP demonstrated comparable efficacy to steroids in reducing pain and lesion size in OLP patients, with the added advantage of fewer side effects. However, significant heterogeneity and publication bias necessitate further high-quality research to substantiate these findings.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40382472What 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.