ArticleGalen medical journal2024
A Comparative Study of The Results of Conventional Surgery and Diode Laser in Maxillary Labial Frenectomy: A Randomized Clinical Trial : Conventional Surgery versus Diode Laser in Maxillary Labial Frenectomy.
Article in Galen medical journal, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Diode Laser-Assisted Oral Frenectomy as a Modern Alternative: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Lasers in surgery and medicine · 2026Pooled it
- Efficacy of diode laser versus conventional scalpel in labial frenectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.Odontology · 2026Pooled it
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The frenum, a flexible tissue structure connecting the lips, tongue, and cheeks to the gingiva, can exhibit abnormalities leading to dental complications such as diastema and restricted movement. This study investigates the efficacy and safety of frenectomy by diode laser, compared to traditional surgical approaches. Materials and Methods: This clinical trial, approved by the ethical committee and registered with the Iranian Registry of Clinical Trials (IRCT20231009059673N1), enrolled 26 patients requiring maxillary labial frenectomy due to papillary or penetrating frenum types who had referred to specialized periodontics department of Jundishapur Dental School of Ahvaz in 2023-2024. Participants were randomly assigned to either a conventional surgical method or the frenectomy by diode laser (Quicklase laser, UK). Surgical procedures were standardized, and various outcome measures-including surgery duration, pain assessment, surgical difficulty, bleeding intensity, swelling, and tissue repair-were evaluated and compared among groups. Results: This study evaluated the outcomes of maxillary labial frenectomy using laser versus conventional methods in 26 participants (19 women, 7 men). Significant differences were found in surgery duration (laser: 341.46 seconds vs. conventional: 675.00 seconds, P 0.001) and pain levels, with the laser group reporting lower pain on Days One (3.53 vs. 6.00, P 0.001) and Seven (0.46 vs. 1.38, P = 0.002). The laser group also experienced less bleeding and swelling, higher healing scores at one week (3.92 vs. 2.61, P 0.001), and required fewer analgesics (5.53 vs. 9.76, P 0.001), demonstrating superior outcomes with laser treatment. Conclusion: In conclusion, the England Quicklase laser method demonstrates significant advantages over conventional frenectomy techniques, including shorter surgery duration, reduced pain and bleeding, improved healing, and lower analgesic use. These findings support the laser's potential as a preferred option for maxillary labial frenectomy, enhancing patient care.
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.