ReviewJournal of oral biology and craniofacial research
Clinical resolution of oral lichenoid lesions after amalgam replacement: A systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies.
Review in Journal of oral biology and craniofacial research. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Inflammation-Driven Epithelial Plasticity in Oral Mucosa Adjacent to Long-Term Restorative Materials: A Retrospective Histopathological and Immunohistochemical Study.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2026Article
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
Introduction: Oral lichenoid lesions (OLLs) can mimic oral lichen planus but are often linked to contact with dental amalgam. Replacement with biocompatible materials has been associated with lesion resolution, yet prior evidence lacked quantitative synthesis. Materials and methods: Following PRISMA 2020 (PROSPERO: CRDXXXXXXXXXX2), eight databases (1986-2024) were searched for adult in vivo studies reporting OLL resolution after amalgam replacement. Two reviewers independently screened, extracted data, and assessed bias (ROBINS-I, Newcastle-Ottawa Scale, JBI). Random-effects meta-analysis estimated pooled odds ratios (OR) for clinical resolution; certainty was graded with GRADE. Results: Of 2368 records, 35 studies were qualitatively synthesized and 11 entered meta-analysis (N = 365). Amalgam was replaced with glass ionomer, ceramics, composite resin, or gold alloys. Replacement markedly increased odds of lesion resolution (OR = 122.18; 95 % CI: 55.64-268.26; p < 0.001) with moderate heterogeneity (I Conclusion: Amalgam replacement was linked with substantially higher odds of OLL resolution. However, between-study heterogeneity and indications of publication bias temper confidence in the pooled effect. Confirmatory, prospective, registered studies with standardized diagnostic criteria, outcome definitions, and material categories are needed to refine effect size estimates and strengthen certainty.
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.