Labial Frenectomy using Laser: A Scoping Review

Table 2

Characteristic of the included studies with the main data extracted from the papers, No. (number), n.r. (data not present), M (male), F (female), min (minutes), s (seconds), and mg (milligrams).

No.	Reference	Study design	Groups	No. of patients (M/F)	Age (years)	Bleeding during surgery	Sutures	Mean surgical time	Analgesic consumption
1	Olivi et al. [13]	Retrospective study	Er:YAG laser	20 (n.r.)	8–10	Yes	No	n.r.	No
2	Sarmadi et al. [14]	Randomized controlled trial	Scalpel	40 (10/30)	8–13	1,080 mg	Yes	10 min 35 s	Yes (11); No (9)
			Er:YAG laser			332 mg	Only in two patients	6 min 52 s	Yes (9); No (11)
3	Júnior et al. [15]	Comparative study	Scalpel	40 (16/24)	8–51	Yes	Yes	10 min 12 s	Yes (16); No (6)
			Nd:YAG laser			Only in one patient	No	7 min 42 s	Yes (13); No (5)
4	Olivi et al. [7]	Retrospective study	Er,Cr:YSGG laser	143 (73/70)	7–11	n.r.	No	7–10 min	No
5	Pié-Sánchez et al. [16]	Randomized controlled trial	CO2 laser	50 (22/28)	11.3	No	n.r.	49.50 s	Yes (1); No (24)
			Er,Cr:YSGG laser			Yes	n.r.	162.56 s	Yes (1); No (24)
6	Gargari et al. [17]	Case report	Diode laser	1 (0/1)	32	No	No	n.r.	No
7	Do Hoang et al. [18]	Retrospective study	Diode laser	30 (20/10)	7–14	Yes (6); No (24)	No	n.r.	Yes (5); No (25)
8	Patel et al. [19]	Randomized controlled trial	Scalpel	20 (8/12)	32.4 ± 7.75	2.37 ± 0.51	Yes	n.r.	4.25 ± 0.7
			Diode laser			0.25 ± 0.46	No	n.r.	1.87 ± 0.83
9	Akpınar et al. [20]	Randomized controlled trial	Scalpel	89 (38/51)	28.75 ± 11.32	n.r.	Yes	9.93 ± 3.32	n.r.
			Nd:YAG laser		29.75 ± 11.58	n.r.	No	8.84 ± 3.11	n.r.

No. (number), n.r. (data not present), M (male), F (female), min (minutes), s (seconds), and mg (milligrams).