Trial reportMedicina oral, patologia oral y cirugia bucal2026
Photobiomodulation for the management of inferior alveolar nerve paresthesia after implant surgery: A randomized clinical trial.
Trial report in Medicina oral, patologia oral y cirugia bucal, 2026. 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
backgroundPhotobiomodulation (PBM) has shown promise for managing nerve paraesthesia. This trial assessed the efficacy of an 810-nm diode laser on deep-mechanical, superficial-mechanical and thermal sensitivity for inferior alveolar nerve paresthesia after implant surgery. MATERIAL AND
methodsTwenty-four adults with recent implant-related paraesthesia were randomly assigned, in a parallel design, to an intervention or control group; both groups received routine vitamin-B supplementation. The intervention group underwent eight diode-laser sessions (200 mW power and 6 J/cm2 energy density) over four weeks, directed at peri-implant mucosa and adjacent cheek skin. The control group attended identical sessions with an inactive laser. Blinded examiners recorded visual-analogue-scale (VAS) scores for the Clamp (deep mechanical), Swab (light mechanical) and Ice (thermal) tests at baseline and at two and four weeks after the final session. Data were analysed with the Shapiro-Wilk test, independent-samples t-test and Friedman test (α=0.05).
resultsAll twenty-four randomised participants (mean age 51±7 years) completed follow-up. Baseline VAS scores did not differ between groups (p>0.44). Although both groups improved over time, the VAS scores for paresthesia reductions in the PBM group were significantly greater than those in the control group at both follow-ups for all three tests (all p<0.001). No adverse events were reported.
conclusionsEight sessions of 810-nm PBM produced faster and more pronounced sensory recovery than sham treatment in patients with implant-related paraesthesia.
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.