SynthesisOdontology2026
Efficacy of diode laser versus conventional scalpel in labial frenectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
Synthesis in Odontology, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
High labial frenum attachments may cause diastema, gingival recession, and hygiene difficulties. Conventional scalpel frenectomy is effective but may cause pain and bleeding. This meta-analysis compared the use of a diode laser versus a conventional scalpel for maxillary labial frenectomy, focusing on postoperative pain, swelling, intraoperative bleeding, and operative time. PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and Embase were searched through September 2025 using MeSH and free-text terms related to "diode laser" and "labial frenectomy." Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the diode laser with the scalpel frenectomy were included. Data were pooled using random-effects meta-analyses, generating mean differences (MDs) or standardized mean differences (SMDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Six RCTs (n = 324) met the inclusion criteria. Compared with the scalpel, diode laser significantly reduced pain on day 1 (MD = -1.19, 95% CI -1.99 to -0.38; p = 0.0038) and day 7 (MD = -0.56, 95% CI -1.07 to -0.05; p = 0.031), but not day 3 (MD = -0.59, p = 0.30). Swelling showed no difference (SMD = -0.21, 95% CI -0.75 to 0.32; p = 0.43). Intraoperative bleeding was markedly reduced (MD = -1.15, 95% CI -1.50 to -0.81; p < 0.0001), and operative time was shorter (MD = -6.96 min, 95% CI -9.71 to -4.20; p < 0.0001). Evidence certainty ranged from low to very low due to the small sample size and heterogeneity of the data. Diode laser-assisted frenectomy demonstrates clinically meaningful advantages-less postoperative pain, superior intraoperative hemostasis, and reduced surgical time-without increasing swelling. However, results should be interpreted cautiously, given limited and heterogeneous evidence.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41369715What 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.