Trial reportBMC oral health2025
Combined posterior superior alveolar and anterior middle superior alveolar nerve blocks with labial infiltration versus nerve blocks alone for pain management in minimally invasive non-surgical periodontal therapy: a split-mouth randomized controlled trial.
Trial report in BMC oral health, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTo compare the efficacy of combining posterior superior alveolar (PSA) block, anterior middle superior alveolar (AMSA) block, and labial infiltration of the maxillary central incisor versus PSA + AMSA alone for pain control during minimally invasive nonsurgical periodontal therapy (MINST).
methodsTwenty-four patients with stage II-III periodontitis were enrolled in the single-center, single-blind, split-mouth randomized controlled trial. The maxillary right and left quadrants were randomized to receive either PSA + AMSA blocks and labial infiltration (test group) or PSA + AMSA alone (control group) during subgingival instrumentation. Pain levels during injection and treatment were assessed using a 100 mm visual analog scale (VAS). Primary outcomes included intraoperative and injection-related pain scores, while secondary outcomes comprised treatment duration, injection time, patient satisfaction, and adverse events. Data were analyzed using GraphPad Prism 9.
resultsTwenty-one subjects completed the study. No significant difference in injection pain was observed between groups (test: 22.74 ± 14.10 mm vs. control: 20.21 ± 12.27 mm; P = 0.248). However, the test group exhibited a statistically significant reduction in intraoperative pain (test: 11.07 ± 10.36 mm vs. control: 16.43 ± 11.55 mm; P = 0.021). Patient satisfaction was significantly higher in the test group [test: 90 (IQR 90-100) vs. control: 90 (80-90); P = 0.004]. No clinically meaningful differences were detected in treatment duration or adverse event rates (P > 0.05).
conclusionsThe combined PSA + AMSA blocks and labial infiltration protocol reduced intraoperative pain and improved satisfaction versus PSA + AMSA blocks, without prolonging treatment. Despite clinical promise, the small sample size limits generalizability, necessitating multicenter trials to validate efficacy and broader applicability.
trial registrationThe trial protocol was retrospectively registered in the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (ChiCTR2400086566) on 05-07-2024.
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.