Trial reportClinical oral investigations2026
Effect of immediate photobiomodulation on pain and inflammation after oral biopsy: A randomized clinical study.
Trial report in Clinical oral investigations, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo evaluate whether photobiomodulation (PBM) reduces postoperative pain and inflammation in patients undergoing a soft tissue oral biopsy, compared with a sham treatment. MATERIALS AND
methodsA prospective, randomized controlled clinical study was conducted. Oral mucosal biopsies were performed using a standardized protocol. Group allocation was carried out using simple randomization. Participants were assigned to two groups: active PBM (n = 31) and simulated (sham) PBM (n = 31). A single intraoral PBM session (wavelength 940 nm, output power 0.5 W) was applied immediately after the biopsy procedure.
resultsNo statistically significant differences were observed between the groups with respect to pain or inflammation reduction during the 7-day follow-up period. Both variables decreased over time in both groups, with no significant group effect or group–time interaction effect (p = 0.279 and p = 0.220, respectively).
conclusionsA single session of PBM applied immediately after a soft tissue oral biopsy did not demonstrate additional benefits compared with sham treatment in reducing postoperative pain or inflammation over a 7-day period. Further studies using optimized PBM protocols are needed to better define its potential role in this clinical setting.
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.