Article Data

  • Views 805
  • Dowloads 187

Original Research

Open Access

Evaluation of parental perceptions of lingual and labial frenectomy on their child: a comparison of CO2 laser and conventional scalpel

  • Jiriys George Ginini1,2
  • Adi Rachmiel1,2
  • Amir Bilder1,2,*,
  • Eyal Botzer3
  • Tal Capucha1,2
  • Saleh Nseir1
  • Chaim Ohayon1
  • Dekel Shilo1,2
  • Omri Emodi1,2

1Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Rambam Health Care Campus, 3109601 Haifa, Israel

2The Ruth and Bruce Rappaport Faculty of Medicine, Technion-Institution of Technology, 3525433 Haifa, Israel

3Pediatric Dentistry, Tel-Aviv Sourasky Medical Center, 64239 Tel-Aviv, Israel

DOI: 10.22514/jocpd.2023.079 Vol.47,Issue 6,November 2023 pp.30-37

Submitted: 12 September 2022 Accepted: 23 November 2022

Published: 03 November 2023

*Corresponding Author(s): Amir Bilder E-mail: a_bilder


To evaluate parental reports of postoperative pain, improvement and satisfaction following frenectomy with scalpel versus carbon dioxide (CO2) laser treatment. Forty-nine patients aged 2–6 years with a short labial or lingual frenulum who required frenectomy were randomly assigned to undergo CO2 laser or scalpel treatment. They were divided into a labial and a lingual frenulum group based on the severity of attachment. Frenectomy was performed using a scalpel or Pixel CO2 10,600 nm laser (Alma Lasers Company, Caesarea, Israel). Postoperative follow-up was conducted via a mobile application where pain was evaluated daily using the visual analog scale (VAS) in the first 72 hours, and painkiller use was recorded. Improvement and satisfaction were evaluated at 1-month post-surgery and compared among the groups. Our results showed significant differences between the degree of clinical attachment of the frenulum, one-month postoperative improvement and satisfaction based on VAS scores (p < 0.001). Although the use of scalpel was associated with lower postoperative pain scores than the CO2 groups, VAS scores of improvement and satisfaction after 1 month were higher in the CO2 groups (p < 0.05). This study showed that although laser was associated with more postoperative pain, it showed greater improvement and higher satisfaction among patients’ parents at 1 month post-surgery compared with scalpel.


Frenectomy; LASER; Tongue-tie; Paediatric; Oral Surgery

Cite and Share

Jiriys George Ginini,Adi Rachmiel,Amir Bilder,Eyal Botzer,Tal Capucha,Saleh Nseir,Chaim Ohayon,Dekel Shilo,Omri Emodi. Evaluation of parental perceptions of lingual and labial frenectomy on their child: a comparison of CO2 laser and conventional scalpel. Journal of Clinical Pediatric Dentistry. 2023. 47(6);30-37.


[1] Walsh J, McKenna Benoit M. Ankyloglossia and other oral ties. Otolaryngologic Clinics of North America. 2019; 52: 795–811.

[2] Mills N, Geddes DT, Amirapu S, Mirjalili SA. Understanding the lingual frenulum: histological structure, tissue composition, and implications for tongue tie surgery. International Journal of Otolaryngology. 2020; 2020: 1820978.

[3] Priyanka M, Emmadi P, Ambalavanan N, Sruthi R, Ramakrishnan T. An overview of frenal attachments. Journal of Indian Society of Periodontology. 2013; 17: 12.

[4] Mills N, Keough N, Geddes DT, Pransky SM, Mirjalili SA. Defining the anatomy of the neonatal lingual frenulum. Clinical Anatomy. 2019; 32: 824–835.

[5] Baxter RT, Zaghi S, Lashley AP. Safety and efficacy of maxillary labial frenectomy in children: a retrospective comparative cohort study. International Orthodontics. 2022; 20: 100630.

[6] Kotlow LA. Oral diagnosis of abnormal frenum attachments in neonates and infants: evaluation and treatment of the maxillary and lingual frenum using the Erbium: YAG laser. Journal of Pediatric Dental Care. 2004; 10: 11–14.

[7] Hand P, Olivi G, Lajolo C, Gioco G, Marigo L, Castagnola R, et al. Short lingual frenum in infants, children and adolescents. Part 1: breastfeeding and gastroesophageal reflux disease improvement after tethered oral tissues release. European Journal of Paediatric Dentistry. 2020; 21: 309–317.

[8] Lalakea ML, Messner AH. Ankyloglossia: does it matter? Pediatric Clinics of North America. 2003; 50: 381–397.

[9] Jain P, Rathee M. Embryology, Tongue. 2021. Available at: (Accessed: 31 December 2021).

[10] Kotlow LA. Ankyloglossia (tongue-tie): a diagnostic and treatment quandary. Quintessence International. 1999; 30: 259–262.

[11] Ballard JL, Auer CE, Khoury JC. Ankyloglossia: assessment, incidence, and effect of frenuloplasty on the breastfeeding dyad. Pediatrics. 2002; 110: e63.

[12] Hogan M, Westcott C, Griffiths M. Randomized, controlled trial of division of tongue-tie in infants with feeding problems. Journal of Paediatrics and Child Health. 2005; 41: 246–250.

[13] Messner AH, Lalakea ML, Aby J, Macmahon J, Bair E. Ankyloglossia. Archives of Otolaryngology—Head & Neck Surgery. 2000; 126: 36.

[14] Ricke LA, Baker NJ, Madlon-Kay DJ, DeFor TA. Newborn tongue-tie: prevalence and effect on breast-feeding. Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine. 2005; 18: 1–7.

[15] Devishree, Gujjari SK, Shubhashini PV. Frenectomy: a review with the reports of surgical techniques. Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research. 2012; 6: 1587–1592.

[16] O’Callahan C, Macary S, Clemente S. The effects of office-based frenotomy for anterior and posterior ankyloglossia on breastfeeding. International Journal of Pediatric Otorhinolaryngology. 2013; 77: 827–832.

[17] Pirnat S. Versatility of an 810 nm diode laser in dentistry: an overview. Journal of Laser and Health Academy. 2007; 4: 1–9.

[18] Cunha RF, Silva JZ, Faria MD. Clinical approach of ankyloglossia in babies: report of two cases. Journal of Clinical Pediatric Dentistry. 2008; 32: 277–281.

[19] Kara C. Evaluation of patient perceptions of frenectomy: a comparison of Nd: YAG laser and conventional techniques. Photomedicine and Laser Surgery. 2008; 26: 147–152.

[20] Protásio ACR, Galvão EL, Falci SGM. Laser techniques or scalpel incision for labial frenectomy: a meta-analysis. Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery. 2019;18: 490–499.

[21] Twycross A, Voepel-Lewis T, Vincent C, Franck LS, von Baeyer CL. A debate on the proposition that self-report is the gold standard in assessment of pediatric pain intensity. The Clinical Journal of Pain. 2015; 31: 707–712.

[22] Olivi G, Chaumanet G, Genovese MD, Beneduce C, Andreana S. Er,Cr:YSGG laser labial frenectomy: a clinical retrospective evaluation of 156 consecutive cases. General Dentistry. 2010; 58: e126–33.

[23] Olivi M, Genovese MD, Olivi G. Laser labial frenectomy: a simplified and predictable technique. Retrospective clinical study. European Journal of Paediatric Dentistry. 2018; 19: 56–60.

[24] Kotlow L. Diagnosis and treatment of ankyloglossia and tied maxillary fraenum in infants using Er:YaG and 1064 diode lasers. European Archives of Paediatric Dentistry. 2011; 12: 106–112.

[25] Haytac MC, Ozcelik O. Evaluation of patient perceptions after frenectomy operations: a comparison of carbon dioxide laser and scalpel techniques. Journal of Periodontology. 2006; 77: 1815–1819.

[26] Tambuwala A, Sangle A, Khan A, Sayed A. Excision of oral leukoplakia by CO2 lasers versus traditional scalpel: a comparative study. Journal of Maxillofacial and Oral Surgery. 2014; 13: 320–327.

[27] Ghaheri BA, Cole M, Fausel SC, Chuop M, Mace JC. Breastfeeding improvement following tongue‐tie and lip‐tie release: a prospective cohort study. The Laryngoscope. 2017; 127: 1217–1223.

[28] Baxter R, Merkel-Walsh R, Baxter BS, Lashley A, Rendell NR. Functional improvements of speech, feeding, and sleep after lingual frenectomy tongue-tie release: a prospective cohort study. Clinical Pediatrics. 2020; 59: 885–892.

[29] Klockars T, Pitkäranta A. Pediatric tongue-tie division: indications, techniques and patient satisfaction. International Journal of Pediatric Otorhinolaryngology. 2009; 73: 1399–1401.

[30] Hamilton DF, Lane JV, Gaston P, Patton JT, Macdonald D, Simpson AH, et al. What determines patient satisfaction with surgery? A prospective cohort study of 4709 patients following total joint replacement. BMJ Open. 2013; 3: e002525.

[31] Yadav RK, Verma UP, Sajjanhar I, Tiwari R, George K. Frenectomy with conventional scalpel and Nd: YAG laser technique: a comparative evaluation. Journal of Indian Society of Periodontology. 2019; 23: 48–52.

Abstracted / indexed in

Science Citation Index Expanded (SciSearch) Created as SCI in 1964, Science Citation Index Expanded now indexes over 9,500 of the world’s most impactful journals across 178 scientific disciplines. More than 53 million records and 1.18 billion cited references date back from 1900 to present.

PubMed (MEDLINE) PubMed comprises more than 35 million citations for biomedical literature from MEDLINE, life science journals, and online books. Citations may include links to full text content from PubMed Central and publisher web sites.

Biological Abstracts Easily discover critical journal coverage of the life sciences with Biological Abstracts, produced by the Web of Science Group, with topics ranging from botany to microbiology to pharmacology. Including BIOSIS indexing and MeSH terms, specialized indexing in Biological Abstracts helps you to discover more accurate, context-sensitive results.

Google Scholar Google Scholar is a freely accessible web search engine that indexes the full text or metadata of scholarly literature across an array of publishing formats and disciplines.

JournalSeek Genamics JournalSeek is the largest completely categorized database of freely available journal information available on the internet. The database presently contains 39226 titles. Journal information includes the description (aims and scope), journal abbreviation, journal homepage link, subject category and ISSN.

Current Contents - Clinical Medicine Current Contents - Clinical Medicine provides easy access to complete tables of contents, abstracts, bibliographic information and all other significant items in recently published issues from over 1,000 leading journals in clinical medicine.

BIOSIS Previews BIOSIS Previews is an English-language, bibliographic database service, with abstracts and citation indexing. It is part of Clarivate Analytics Web of Science suite. BIOSIS Previews indexes data from 1926 to the present.

Journal Citation Reports/Science Edition Journal Citation Reports/Science Edition aims to evaluate a journal’s value from multiple perspectives including the journal impact factor, descriptive data about a journal’s open access content as well as contributing authors, and provide readers a transparent and publisher-neutral data & statistics information about the journal.

Scopus: CiteScore 2.0 (2022) Scopus is Elsevier's abstract and citation database launched in 2004. Scopus covers nearly 36,377 titles (22,794 active titles and 13,583 Inactive titles) from approximately 11,678 publishers, of which 34,346 are peer-reviewed journals in top-level subject fields: life sciences, social sciences, physical sciences and health sciences.

Submission Turnaround Time