Trial reportOral diseases2025
Efficacy of Combined vs. Monotherapy in Oral Lichen Planus: A Randomized Clinical Trial.
Trial report in Oral diseases, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Micro-Needle Assisted Transmucosal Delivery of Triamcinolone and Hyaluronic Acid for the Treatment of Oral Lichen Planus: A Randomized Clinical Trial.Oral diseases · 2026Trial
- Treatments in oral lichen planus: a review.Frontiers in oral health · 2026Review
- Triamcinolone acetate and triamcinolone-isotretinoin efficacy in oral lichen planus management: Original clinical study.Bioinformation · 2026Article
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
objectivesThe aim of this study was to compare the topical therapeutic efficacy of triamcinolone acetonide (TA) (0.2%) plus hyaluronic acid (HA) (0.1%) versus monotherapy in patients with symptomatic oral lichen planus (OLP), as well as to investigate the oxidative stress of saliva under the different treatments. MATERIALS AND
methodsSixty OLP patients were included in a randomized, double-blind, singlecenter study with a treatment duration of 28 days and 3-month follow-up period. Participants were randomized into three groups: Group I (TA + HA), Group II (TA), and Group III (HA). Treatment efficacy was assessed by means of Thongprasom scale, Oral Health Impact Profile-14 (OHIP-14), and visual analog scale (VAS). In addition, biochemical analyses were performed in order to determine the level of antioxidant biomarkers in saliva, including superoxide dismutase (SOD), glutathione (GSH), and total antioxidant capacity (TAC).
resultsAll treatments seem to exhibit a significant effect in accordance with Thongprasom scale (p < 0.001), VAS reduction (p < 0.001), and OHIP14 (p < 0.05), which maintains over time. No significant changes in salivary oxidative stress in any of the three groups occurred.
conclusionsThe results exhibited a significant improvement in the treated patients in all three groups. There were no significant changes in salivary stress biomarkers under treatment condition.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.