ArticleBMC oral health2025
Comparative efficacy of minimally invasive lavage with negative pressure sealing drainage versus traditional incision and drainage combined with ornidazole for oral and maxillofacial space infections: a retrospective study.
Article 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo compare the efficacy between minimally invasive lavage with negative pressure sealing drainage and traditional incision and drainage (both in combination with ornidazole) on pain relief, reduction of serum inflammatory factors, and wound healing in patients with oral and maxillofacial space infection.
methodsThis retrospective cohort study included 130 patients with OMSI. Patients were assigned to the Conventional Group (ornidazole with traditional incision and drainage, n = 59) or the Research Group (ornidazole with minimally invasive lavage and negative pressure sealing drainage, n = 71). Baseline infection severity was assessed using the Odontogenic Infection Severity Score (OISS). Outcomes included wound healing time, granulation growth time, length of hospital stay, clinical efficacy, postoperative pain (VAS), serum inflammatory markers (WBC, NEUT, PCT, IL−6, TNF-α), and postoperative infection rates. Statistical analyses incorporated False Discovery Rate (FDR) correction for multiple comparisons.
resultsThe Research Group demonstrated significantly shorter wound healing time, granulation growth time, and hospital stay compared to the Conventional Group (all PFDR < 0.001). The Research Group also showed significantly greater improvement in clinical symptoms, including a larger reduction in abscess diameter and a greater increase in mouth opening (PFDR < 0.001), as well as significantly lower VAS scores at 1 and 5 days postoperatively (PFDR < 0.001). At 1 day post-surgery, the Research Group had significantly lower levels of all serum inflammatory markers (PFDR < 0.001), with large effect sizes. The overall incidence of postoperative infection was significantly lower in the Research Group (2.82%) than in the Conventional Group (11.86%) (P = 0.043).
conclusionOrnidazole combined with minimally invasive lavage and negative pressure sealing drainage can effectively shorten the wound healing time of OMSI patients, improve clinical symptoms, relieve inflammatory response and pain, and has high safety.
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.