ArticleAnimal models and experimental medicine2026
A self-retaining mouth prop for intraoral access during periodontal surgery in rat models: A technical note.
Article in Animal models and experimental medicine, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundRodent models are widely used in oral health research; however, maintaining stable and effective intraoral retraction in the small oral cavity is challenging. Manual retraction methods often lead to procedural instability, operator fatigue, and increased tissue trauma during rodent oral surgery.
methodsA stainless-steel wire mouth prop incorporating helices for self-retention and auxiliary lateral soft tissue displacement prongs was fabricated. 32 adult Wistar albino rats were randomly allocated to two groups (n = 16 each). In the experimental group, procedures were performed using a custom mouth prop, and the control group underwent conventional manual retraction. Outcomes included time to achieve adequate retraction, slippage events per procedure, operator fatigue scores, and complication rates. Student's t-test was used for statistical analysis of retraction time, and the Mann-Whitney U test was used for slippage frequency, and fatigue scores. Statistical significance was determined using a Bonferroni-adjusted threshold of p < 0.017.
resultsRetraction time was significantly shorter in the experimental group (2.5 ± 0.6 min) than in control group (6.3 ± 1.2 min, p < 0.001). Slippage events per procedure were markedly lower with mouth prop (0.1 vs. 3.4 ± 1.1, p < 0.001). Operator fatigue scores were also reduced (2.4 ± 0.8 vs. 7.2 ± 1.4, p < 0.001). Complication rates were significantly lower in the experimental group (p = 0.024).
conclusionThe proposed custom-made mouth prop demonstrated favorable procedural handling characteristics during rat intraoral surgery and may serve as a practical, low-cost refinement tool for improving intraoral access and procedural stabilization in experimental oral research settings.
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.