ReviewCureus2026
The Role of Toluidine Blue Vital Staining in the Diagnosis of Oral Mucosal Lesions in Dental Practice: A Narrative Review.
Review in Cureus, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Oral cancer imposes a disproportionate global health burden, with persistently poor survival rates primarily attributable to late-stage diagnosis. oral potentially malignant disorders (OPMDs) are identifiable and clinically actionable precursors to the development of most oral squamous cell carcinomas (OSCCs). However, accurate risk stratification in routine dental practice remains a challenge. Toluidine blue (TB) vital staining, a cationic, acidophilic, metachromatic dye with selective affinity for nucleic acid-rich dysplastic and malignant epithelium, has been employed as a chairside adjunctive diagnostic tool for more than four decades. This narrative review synthesizes the current evidence on the mechanism of TB staining, its diagnostic accuracy, and its utility within the broader landscape of adjunctive tools available to dental practitioners. TB demonstrates a pooled sensitivity of 71% to 95% and specificity of 68% to 81%, with its diagnostic odds ratio consistently exceeding that of clinical visual examination. Compared with light-based adjunctive tools, TB exhibits superior specificity to chemiluminescence and autofluorescence, although its sensitivity is lower than that of both techniques. The integration of TB into a multimodal diagnostic protocol, combining clinical examination, staining, and, where indicated, histopathological confirmation, optimizes the detection of high-risk lesions, guides biopsy site selection, and supports surgical-margin assessment. Known limitations include false positives from inflammatory conditions, false negatives in hyperkeratotic lesions, and operator-dependent interpretation. Emerging technologies, such as reflection spectroscopy, artificial intelligence-assisted image analysis, and combined multimodal platforms, offer potential solutions to address these constraints. Dental practitioners who incorporate TB into a structured clinical workflow, interpreted alongside the full clinical picture, are well positioned to improve early detection and reduce diagnostic delay, which remains a major determinant of oral cancer mortality.
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.