Trial reportAesthetic plastic surgery2026
Comparative Efficacy and Patient-centered Outcomes of Intraoral Submucosal Zonal Injection Versus Traditional Extra-oral Injection for Improving Perioral Contour: A Randomized Controlled Trial.
Trial report in Aesthetic plastic surgery, 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
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundIntraoral injection techniques have been reported in various countries, with their advantages well documented. Drawing upon existing literature on intraoral injections, we developed a novel intraoral submucosal zonal injection technique that has demonstrated promising therapeutic outcomes. However, its efficacy and safety require further validation through standardized clinical practice.
objectiveThe aim is compare the efficacy and safety of traditional extra-oral with novel intraoral submucosal zonal injection technique for improving perioral contour and assess the clinical applicability of the intraoral technique.
methodFifty-two female patients (aged 24-43) with perioral aging were randomized to receive either the traditional extra-oral injection group (Group A, n=26) or the intraoral submucosal zonal injection group (Group B, n=26). Efficacy was assessed using blinded digital photographic analysis, Global Aesthetic Improvement Scale, and Wrinkle Severity Rating Scale. Patient satisfaction, procedural pain, and adverse events were monitored.
resultIntraoral submucosal zonal injection demonstrated clinical efficacy equivalent to extra-oral injection on GAIS and WSRS assessments, while significantly improving procedural comfort. This technique showed enhanced patient-rated acceptability in perioral regions including nasolabial folds, accompanied by significantly reduced VAS pain scores and decreased adverse event incidence.
conclusionCompared to traditional extra-oral injection, intraoral submucosal zonal injection shows certain clinical advantages: significantly enhanced patient satisfaction and reducing the incidence of adverse reactions such as procedural pain. It can serve as an alternative option for improving perioral contour, particularly suitable for patients prioritizing comfort and minimal downtime. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE V: This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 .
Indexed as
Identifiers
41820616What 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.