As a Pathway 2 instructor, I have the privilege of working with hundreds of aspiring International Board Certified Lactation Consultants (IBCLCs) each year. Across every cohort, the topic of tongue-tie—or ankyloglossia—inevitably comes up. Students are eager to learn how to identify it, how to manage it within the context of breastfeeding, and what the current research says about its impact. Their curiosity reflects a broader trend I’ve noticed in the lactation field: a growing preoccupation with tongue-tie that seems far more intense than when I first became an IBCLC in 2010.
Back then, tongue-tie was discussed occasionally, usually in the context of speech development or severe latch issues. Today, however, it’s not uncommon for lactation professionals to view nearly every feeding challenge through the lens of a possible oral restriction. In many ways, it seems we’ve become obsessed with tongue-tie. This shift—both cultural and clinical—prompted me to step back and ask: Where did this obsession come from?
To better inform my students and contribute to a more balanced understanding of tongue-tie, I conducted a deep historical and scientific investigation. This paper explores the evolving recognition and treatment of tongue-tie, from ancient midwifery to modern laser surgery. It critically examines the quality of the evidence, clinical controversies, and international practice variations, all in an effort to help lactation professionals contextualize their approach to this increasingly common diagnosis.
Ancient and Classical References
Tongue-tie has been recognized as a condition for many centuries. Some of the earliest references date back to antiquity. Around 400 BCE, the physician Hippocrates reportedly noted that a short lingual frenulum could affect speech and even suggested cutting the frenulum in cases of lisps (Sioda, T. W., & Thorley, V., 2023). In the 1st century CE, the Roman author Celsus described a procedure to snip the frenulum, believing it could improve speech clarity (Sioda, T. W., & Thorley, V., 2023). Ancient Greek medicine thus already contemplated surgical intervention for tongue-tie (Obalden, 2010). These early interventions were crude by today’s standards and based on limited anatomical knowledge, but they established tongue-tie as a known issue in infants and children.
Middle Ages: Midwives vs. Surgeons
During the Middle Ages, tongue-tie treatment became a point of contention between traditional birth attendants and the emerging medical profession. Midwives — who were responsible for most childbirth and newborn care — often kept one fingernail long and sharp specifically to snip a newborn’s tight frenulum immediately after birth (Obalden, 2010). This was a quick remedy to help babies latch and suckle if they appeared “tongue-tied.” However, as barber-surgeons and physicians gained authority, they claimed that only they should perform such procedures (using scalpels or scissors). A professional rivalry ensued: midwives had been performing frenulum cuts by fingernail for generations, but surgeons sought to medicalize the practice with surgical instruments (Sioda, T. W., & Thorley, V., 2023). Historical accounts even describe this as a “power struggle” – midwives versus surgeons – over who had the right to treat tongue-tie (Sioda, T. W., & Thorley, V., 2023). Despite the debate, the practice of newborn frenotomy (cutting the tongue-tie) persisted throughout medieval Europe, driven by the practical need to ensure infants could feed.
Early Modern Era (16th–19th Centuries)
By the 16th and 17th centuries, attention to tongue-tie increasingly focused on its impact on breastfeeding. Mothers who struggled to nurse often blamed a short frenulum for the baby’s poor latch or weak suck. This led to a surge of frenulum-snipping in newborns during this period (Sioda, T. W., & Thorley, V., 2023). Midwives or physicians might cut the frenulum if an infant wasn’t feeding well, though the understanding of efficacy was largely anecdotal. Such interventions were sometimes shrouded in superstition or folk beliefs (Sioda, T. W., & Thorley, V., 2023)
Early medical texts began to discuss tongue-tie. For example, 17th- and 18th-century infant care manuals routinely mentioned inspecting the newborn’s tongue and sometimes advised freeing a tethered tongue to aid nursing. Surgical instruments for tongue-tie also evolved. Historical records note that by the 1700s and 1800s, freeing the tongue was common enough that specialized scissors or knives were part of some birth kits (Walsh and Benoit, 2019). In fact, in the 19th century it was routine in certain settings to check and clip a newborn’s frenulum if needed. One account even noted that the instrument for tongue-tie was included in newborn circumcision trays – implying that both circumcision and tongue-tie release were expected procedures before a newborn went home (Walsh and Benoit, 2019)
Despite widespread practice, not everyone endorsed frenotomy. Historical critics cautioned that tongue-tie was sometimes overdiagnosed. In 1791, a Berlin obstetrician lamented that “frequently the parents are deceived, for profit, greed and ignorance this aid is abused, and one unties where nothing is tied” (Douglas, 2017). In other words, even back then some felt that practitioners were cutting tongues needlessly for financial gain or out of misguided caution. This 18th-century skepticism shows that the controversy over treating tongue-tie is not new – concerns about over-treatment versus genuine need have existed for centuries.
Early 20th Century
In the early 20th century, tongue-tie releases were still relatively routine in newborn care. As hospital births became more common, many obstetricians or midwives would examine a newborn’s mouth and clip the frenulum if it looked tight or if there were any feeding concerns. Newborn frenotomy was considered a simple precaution to facilitate feeding or prevent speech issues later. As noted, the tool to perform a frenotomy often sat right alongside other standard newborn instruments (Walsh and Benoit, 2019)
However, by the mid-20th century, medical attitudes shifted dramatically. The introduction of commercial infant formula around the 1940s–1950s led to a steep decline in breastfeeding rates in the United States (Walsh and Benoit, 2019). With bottle-feeding as a widely accepted alternative, infant feeding problems were less often seen as urgent medical issues – if a baby had trouble nursing at the breast, families could switch to the bottle. Consequently, tongue-tie began to be viewed as an overblown or even “outdated” concern. By the 1960s and 1970s, many pediatricians were taught that tongue-tie rarely caused significant trouble. Some outright denied that tongue-tie was a real problem for feeding, or believed that the frenulum would stretch on its own as the child grew (Walsh and Benoit, 2019) During these decades, relatively few babies underwent frenotomy. The once-common practice of clipping newborn tongues fell out of favor in mainstream medicine.
Late 20th Century: The Breastfeeding Revival
The late 20th century saw a reversal of the mid-century trend. In the 1970s, the natural childbirth and pro-breastfeeding movement gathered momentum. There was a cultural push for mothers to return to breastfeeding as the optimal way to feed infants. As breastfeeding rates began to rise again, so did awareness of anything that might hinder nursing success (Walsh and Benoit, 2019). Health professionals and new lactation support roles (like International Board-Certified Lactation Consultants (IBCLCs), a certification established in 1985) started to pay closer attention to infant mouth anatomy. Tongue-tie, which had been largely ignored for a few decades, re-entered the discussion as a possible cause of breastfeeding pain and poor infant weight gain.
In the 1980s and 1990s, small studies and case reports began suggesting that ankyloglossia could indeed interfere with breastfeeding and that clipping the frenulum might help in certain cases (Walsh and Benoit, 2019). Parents who struggled with nursing were once again encouraged to have providers check for tongue-tie. Pediatric dentists and ENT surgeons also became more involved in diagnosing and treating the condition, alongside pediatricians. By the end of the 1990s, tongue-tie was no longer a forgotten issue – it was gradually becoming a hot topic in infant feeding circles, setting the stage for what would follow.
21st Century: Tongue-Tie Boom and Ongoing Debates
In the past two decades, the United States has experienced an explosive surge in tongue-tie diagnoses and treatments – what some have called a modern “tongue-tie epidemic” or “frenulum frenzy.” A 2017 study using U.S. nationwide hospital data found an 834% increase in reported diagnoses of tongue-tie in infants from 1997 to 2012, accompanied by an 866% increase in frenotomy surgeries during the same period (Walsh et al., 2017). Notably, these numbers only captured in-hospital procedures on newborns before discharge, so they underestimate the true scope – many additional babies undergo tongue-tie releases later in infancy at outpatient clinics (Walsh et al., 2017). Similar spikes have been documented in other countries like Canada and Australia as well (Walsh and Benoit, 2019), but the trend has been particularly pronounced in the U.S.
Why the sudden obsession? Experts point to several converging factors behind the tongue-tie boom in America:
Breastfeeding Renaissance: Today there is intense emphasis on exclusive breastfeeding. By 2015, over 83% of U.S. mothers initiated breastfeeding (CDC, 2024), a higher rate than a generation earlier. With this breastfeeding-first culture, parents and providers are highly motivated to overcome any nursing difficulties. Unlike in the mid-1900s, switching to formula is now seen as less desirable; instead, families seek solutions to breastfeed successfully (Cautero, R. M.,2019). This has put tongue-tie in the spotlight as a common “fixable” explanation when babies have latch or weight-gain problems. As one physician explained, “We’re seeing [tongue-tie diagnoses] more now because of the stress women are putting on themselves to breastfeed” (Cautero, R. M.,2019) In the past, if breastfeeding didn’t work out, parents more readily accepted bottle-feeding, but today’s parents actively look for a medical reason – like a tongue-tie – to explain and resolve breastfeeding challenges (Cautero, R. M.,2019)
Lactation Consultant Influence: The rise of lactation consultants and breastfeeding support groups means more professionals are examining infants’ mouths early on. A lactation consultant who observes a poor latch often checks for a tight frenulum. If a tie is suspected, mothers are frequently referred to a specialist (pediatric ENT or pediatric dentist) for evaluation and possible frenotomy (Cautero, R. M.,2019). In some cases, the pediatrician might not even be the primary driver – the recommendation may come from lactation or dental specialists (Cautero, R. M.,2019). This specialized focus has undoubtedly increased diagnoses: parents who might never have known about tongue-tie are now being alerted to it by breastfeeding advisors.
Greater Awareness (and Anxiety) Among Parents: Through social media, parenting blogs, and online forums, awareness of tongue-tie has spread rapidly among new mothers. It’s often discussed in parenting circles as a culprit for all sorts of infant issues. As one journalist quipped, “In online mom groups, it’s blamed for all sorts of parenting woes… It’s called tongue tie, and it’s everywhere.” (Cautero, R. M.,2019). This community-driven awareness means parents are now asking doctors about tongue-tie or seeking out tongue-tie evaluations on their own. Consumer demand has, in a sense, led to more diagnoses – a dynamic where worried mothers might self-diagnose from the internet and then consult providers to confirm and treat the tie (Douglas, 2017). Some commentators indeed argue that the recent tongue-tie trend is “being led by consumer demand,” amplified by social media and peer influence (Douglas, 2017).
Technological and Clinical Changes: The advent of laser frenotomy (a quick laser cut of the frenulum) and refined surgical techniques have made tongue-tie releases easier to perform. Many pediatric dentists now offer laser tongue-tie procedures in-office, which can be done in minutes with minimal bleeding. The relative safety and simplicity of the procedure (usually done with just topical anesthetic and swaddling, not general anesthesia) (Cautero, R. M.,2019) may lower the threshold to proceed with surgery. Practitioners know that a frenotomy is low-risk and potentially immediately effective for breastfeeding pain, which can encourage a “why not do it?” mentality for borderline cases. Additionally, new diagnostic tools and classification systems (such as the Coryllos or Hazelbaker assessment tools) have emerged, attempting to standardize what constitutes a significant tongue-tie (Walsh and Benoit, 2019). This has medicalized the diagnosis further, though no single consensus exists, leading different providers to diagnose tongue-tie at vastly different rates.
Modern Frenotomy: Evidence Gaps and Controversies
Despite the dramatic rise in frenotomy procedures in recent decades—particularly in the United States—a growing body of research highlights significant gaps in the evidence supporting its widespread use. This is especially true for laser frenotomy, which has become increasingly common despite limited comparative or long-term data. Several key issues frame the ongoing debate: weak evidence of efficacy, variability in aftercare, surgical risks, and a lack of research comparing surgical techniques.
What Do We Know?
We know that frenotomy can offer short-term relief of maternal nipple pain and may improve latch scores (Wen et al., 2022; Feldman et al., 2006). Some studies show statistically significant improvements in maternal comfort, LATCH scores, and feeding duration after frenotomy, particularly when performed for anterior tongue-tie (Cordray et al., 2022; Geddes et al., 2008). Case series and observational cohorts often report improved maternal satisfaction and reduced breastfeeding frustration (Ballard et al., 2002).
We also know that frenotomy is generally considered low-risk when performed by trained providers (Pakuła et al., 2024; Messner et al., 2020). It is most effective when the infant’s feeding difficulty has been clearly linked to a restrictive frenulum and when conservative lactation management has already been attempted (LeFort et al., 2021).
What Do We Not Know?
We do not have strong, consistent evidence that frenotomy improves long-term breastfeeding duration, exclusive breastfeeding rates, infant weight gain, or speech outcomes (Bruney et al., 2022; Anderson et al., 2023; Visconti et al., 2021). Most studies rely on short-term, maternal-reported outcomes like pain relief rather than objective measures of infant feeding.
Critically, there is no randomized controlled trial comparing laser and scissor techniques, despite a cultural preference for laser among many clinicians (Khan et al., 2020; Souza et al., 2024). Laser frenotomies are promoted as more precise or less painful, yet this assumption is not supported by comparative data. In fact, some studies associate laser frenotomy with increased rates of oral aversion and post-operative discomfort, especially when coupled with aggressive aftercare protocols (Baxter et al., 2020; Francis et al., 2015).
We also do not have a universally accepted or validated tool for diagnosing ankyloglossia. Tools like the Hazelbaker Assessment Tool for Lingual Frenulum Function (HATLFF), the Coryllos classification, and the Bristol Tongue Assessment Tool (BTAT) are commonly used. While the Hazelbaker tool has demonstrated good interrater reliability for appearance items, its function items are more subjective and less consistent between raters (Akbari et al., 2023). As such, there is still no gold standard for determining when tongue-tie is truly affecting feeding.
Where Are the Gaps?
Technique Comparison: No direct evidence comparing scissors to laser frenotomy in terms of outcomes, risks, or reattachment rates (Khan et al., 2020; Pakuła et al., 2024).
Outcome Measures: Most studies emphasize maternal comfort, but few include objective data on milk transfer, such as pre- and post-feed weights or 24-hour intake (Geddes et al., 2008; Visconti et al., 2021).
Long-Term Data: Very few studies follow dyads beyond a few weeks. There is insufficient evidence that frenotomy reduces the risk of weaning, speech delay, or feeding disorders later in infancy (Francis et al., 2015; Anderson et al., 2023).
Aftercare Evidence: No studies clearly support the need for post-frenotomy wound stretching or myofunctional therapy. Practices vary widely with no consensus (Bhandarkar et al., 2022; Chowdhury et al., 2024).
Takeaways for Students and New Professionals
Encourage Critical Thinking: Students must learn to ask not just “Does the baby have a tongue-tie?” but rather “Is the baby able to breastfeed effectively?” and “Has conservative management been fully explored?”
Functional Focus: Emphasize assessment of feeding function, not just anatomical appearance. Teach the importance of observing the entire dyad (LeFort et al., 2021).
Know the Limits of Evidence: Help students understand that frenotomy is often helpful—but not always necessary. Explain that much of the support for laser over scissors is based on perception, not data (Khan et al., 2020; Visconti et al., 2021).
Prioritize Dyad-Centered Care: Encourage students to take a holistic view. Many feeding challenges can be managed with positioning, latch work, and maternal support without surgery (López-Segura et al., 2025).
Model Evidence-Based Practice: Show students how to consult the literature, weigh risks and benefits, and make ethically grounded recommendations (Anderson et al., 2023).
Teach Multidisciplinary Collaboration: Highlight the importance of working with pediatricians, ENTs, dentists, and bodyworkers—while staying within the IBCLC scope of practice.
Conclusion
As lactation professionals, we are often the first to recognize feeding challenges in the early postpartum period. With that role comes the responsibility of discerning when interventions—like frenotomy—are truly warranted, and when conservative management may be more appropriate. What this deep dive revealed is that tongue-tie is not a new phenomenon, but our current approach to it is uniquely modern. From sharpened fingernails of medieval midwives to today’s widespread use of lasers, our methods have evolved—but so have our assumptions.
The research remains mixed. While some infants and families clearly benefit from frenotomy, especially in cases of significant latch dysfunction, much of the current practice is not grounded in robust evidence. The lack of standardized diagnostic criteria, the inconsistent aftercare recommendations, and the absence of long-term outcome data—particularly comparing scissors and laser techniques—should give us pause.
For my students and colleagues, the takeaway is this: understanding the history and evidence behind tongue-tie is essential. We must approach this diagnosis not with fear or overconfidence, but with critical thinking, humility, and a deep commitment to individualized care. Tongue-tie may be part of a breastfeeding challenge—but it is rarely the whole story. In training the next generation of IBCLCs, my goal is not to downplay the importance of oral anatomy, but to place it within its proper clinical and historical context. Only then can we truly serve the dyads we support with wisdom and integrity.
References
Akbari, D., Bogaardt, H., & Docking, K. (2023). Ankyloglossia in Central Australia: Prevalence, identification and management in infants. International Journal of Pediatric Otorhinolaryngology, 170, 111604. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijporl.2023.111604
Anderson, J., Prabhu, P., & Graham, M. E. (2023). Ankyloglossia (tongue tie) in infants. Canadian Medical Association Journal, 195(39), E1349–E1352. https://doi.org/10.1503/cmaj.230151
Ballard, J. L., Auer, C. E., & Khoury, J. C. (2002). Ankyloglossia: Assessment, incidence, and effect of frenuloplasty on the breastfeeding dyad. Pediatrics, 110(5), e63. https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.110.5.e63
Baxter, R., Merkel-Walsh, R., Stark Baxter, B., Lashley, A., & Rendell, N. R. (2020). Functional improvements of speech, feeding, and sleep after lingual frenectomy: A prospective cohort study. Clinical Pediatrics, 59(9–10), 885–892. https://doi.org/10.1177/0009922820928055
Bhandarkar, N., Valdez, D. S., & Teichgraeber, J. F. (2022). Post-operative massage after lingual frenotomy does not affect outcomes in breastfeeding infants: A retrospective cohort study. International Journal of Pediatric Otorhinolaryngology, 157, 111135. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijporl.2022.111135
Bruney, M., Granger, M., & Lucas, M. (2022). Systematic review of the evidence for resolution of common breastfeeding problems following frenotomy in infants with ankyloglossia. Acta Paediatrica, 111(6), 1145–1151. https://doi.org/10.1111/apa.16285
Campanha, S. M., Tavares, K. M. V., & Rocha, L. P. (2019). Implications of ankyloglossia on breastfeeding. Journal of Human Growth and Development, 29(1), 65–71. https://doi.org/10.7322/jhgd.157763
Canadian Paediatric Society. (2011). Ankyloglossia and breastfeeding. Paediatrics & Child Health, 16(4), 222. https://doi.org/10.1093/pch/16.4.222
Cautero, R. M. (2019, March 12). Why so many babies are getting their tongues clipped. The Atlantic. Retrieved from https://www.theatlantic.com/family/archive/2019/03/breast-feeding-and-tongue-tie/584503/
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2024, June). 2022 Breastfeeding Report Card [PDF]. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. https://www.cdc.gov/breastfeeding-data/media/pdfs/2024/06/2022-Breastfeeding-Report-Card-508.pd
Cherian, D., Saeed, R., Anusha, K., Rag, B., & Peter, T. (2023). Management of ankyloglossia by functional frenuloplasty using diode laser. Journal of Orthodontic Science, 12, 23. https://doi.org/10.4103/jos.jos_20_22
Chowdhury, F. A., Asgar, M. A., & Sadia, S. (2024). Alternative therapies for ankyloglossia-associated breastfeeding challenges: A systematic review. International Breastfeeding Journal, 19, Article 16. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13006-024-00650-7
Cordray, D. S., Ramos, D. A., & Peters, R. A. (2022). Severity and prevalence of ankyloglossia-associated breastfeeding symptoms: A meta-analysis. Acta Paediatrica, 111(3), 572–580. https://doi.org/10.1111/apa.16221
Dezio, M., Piras, A., Gallottini, L., & Denotti, G. (2015). Tongue-tie, from embryology to treatment: A literature review. Journal of Pediatric and Neonatal Individualized Medicine, 4(1), e040101. https://doi.org/10.7363/040101
Douglas, P. S. (2017, September 1). Untangling the tongue‑tie epidemic. Medical Republic. Retrieved from https://www.medicalrepublic.com.au/untangling‑the‑tongue‑tie‑epidemic/1328
Feldman, P., Messner, A. H., & Warner, J. (2006). Ankyloglossia in breastfeeding infants: The effect of frenotomy on maternal nipple pain and latch. Journal of Human Lactation, 22(4), 450–457. https://doi.org/10.1177/0890334406291315
Ferrés-Amat, E., Pastor-Vera, T., Rodríguez-Alessi, P., Mareque-Bueno, S., & Ferres-Amat, E. (2016). Management of ankyloglossia and breastfeeding difficulties in the newborn: A case report. Case Reports in Pediatrics, 2016, 1–4. https://doi.org/10.1155/2016/4914953
Francis, D. O., Krishnaswami, S., McPheeters, M., et al. (2015). Treatments for ankyloglossia and ankyloglossia with concomitant lip-tie. Comparative Effectiveness Review No. 149. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. https://effectivehealthcare.ahrq.gov/products/tongue-tie/research
Geddes, D. T., Langton, D. B., Gollow, I., Jacobs, L. A., Hartmann, P. E., & Simmer, K. (2008). Frenulotomy for breastfeeding infants with ankyloglossia: Effect on milk removal and sucking mechanism as imaged by ultrasound. Pediatrics, 122(1), e188–e194. https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2007-2553
Kim, Y. H., et al. (2021). Delayed hemorrhage following laser frenotomy leading to hypovolemic shock. Clinical and Experimental Otorhinolaryngology, 14(2), 227–230. https://doi.org/10.21053/ceo.2020.02064
Kinney, R., Burris, R. C., Moffat, R., & Almpani, K. (2024). Assessment and management of maxillary labial frenum—A scoping review. Diagnostics, 14(1710). https://doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics14161710
Khan, U., MacPherson, J., Bezuhly, M., & Hong, P. (2020). Comparison of frenotomy techniques for the treatment of ankyloglossia in children: A systematic review. Otolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery, 163(3), 428–443. https://doi.org/10.1177/0194599820917619
LeFort, Y. M., Mattes, E., & Noble, L. (2021). Academy of Breastfeeding Medicine position statement on ankyloglossia in breastfeeding dyads. Breastfeeding Medicine, 16(7), 563–567. https://doi.org/10.1089/bfm.2021.29188.ymn
López-Segura, N., López-Cabezas, C., & García-Tur, F. (2025). Experiences of breastfeeding mothers of infants with ankyloglossia: A qualitative study. International Breastfeeding Journal, 20, Article 3. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13006-024-00671-2
Messner, A. H., Lalakea, M. L., Aby, J., Macmahon, J., & Bair, E. (2020). Clinical consensus statement: Ankyloglossia in children. Otolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery, 162(5), 597–611. https://doi.org/10.1177/0194599820917913
Obalden, M. (2010). Much ado about nothing: two millennia of controversy on tongue-tie. Neonatology. 97(2): 83-9. doi: 10.1159/000235682
Pakuła, A., Chrzan, R., & Śmigiel, R. (2024). Diagnosis and management of ankyloglossia in newborns: A literature review. Journal of Pediatric Nursing, 71, 23–30. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pedn.2023.11.002
Sioda, T. W., & Thorley, V. (2023). Tongue-tie in newborns – A history of changing medical attitudes. Logopedia, 52(1), 21–45. https://doi.org/10.24335/m3cq-0190
Souza, A. L. F., Lima, M. D., & Figueiredo, A. M. (2024). Ankyloglossia and breastfeeding: A scoping review. Journal of Pediatric Otorhinolaryngology, 162, 111772. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijporl.2022.111772
Tomara, E., Dagla, M., Antoniou, E., & Iatrakis, G. (2023). Ankyloglossia as a barrier to breastfeeding: A literature review. Children, 10(12), 1902. https://doi.org/10.3390/children10121902
Visconti, A., Doyle, S., & Suter, V. (2021). Ankyloglossia: A systematic review of outcomes following frenotomy. Journal of Clinical Speech and Language Studies, 29(1), 17–32.
Walsh, J., & Benoit, M. (2019). Ankyloglossia and other oral ties. Otolaryngologic Clinics of North America, 52(5), 795–811. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.otc.2019.06.008
Wen, Z., Walner, D. L., Popova, Y., & Walner, E. G. (2022). Tongue-tie and breastfeeding. International Journal of Otorhinolaryngology. 160, 1-6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijporl.2022.111242
Wongwattana, N., et al. (2022). Does observation or surgery for newborn ankyloglossia result in improved breastfeeding outcomes? International Journal of Pediatric Otorhinolaryngology, 160, 111246. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijporl.2022.111246
Zaaba, N. A. A. B., Rajasekar, A., & Sundari, S. K. K. (2021). Evaluation of healing following frenectomy: A comparison of laser and surgical techniques. Bioinformation, 17(12), 1138–1143. https://doi.org/10.6026/973206300171134
