Tongue-tie research: the evidence 2026

Research into infant tongue-tie continues to explore the relationship between oral anatomy and function, how feeding difficulties should be assessed, which infants may benefit from frenulotomy and what constitutes appropriate postoperative care. Some studies report improvements following frenulotomy, particularly in maternal nipple pain, while systematic reviews highlight limitations in the quality and consistency of the available evidence.

For families exploring tongue-tie, interpreting research can be challenging. A study may examine one assessment method, one aspect of feeding or a specific postoperative intervention, whereas an individual feeding experience involves several interacting factors.

This article reviews significant research themes, relevant professional guidance and areas where further evidence is needed. It distinguishes findings from individual studies, professional recommendations and practitioner audit data, as these sources answer different questions.

1. Anatomy and function need to be considered together

Tongue-tie, also known as ankyloglossia, describes a lingual frenulum that restricts tongue movement. However, the presence or appearance of a lingual frenulum does not, by itself, establish whether it is functionally restrictive.

Thomas et al. (2024), in a clinical report from the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP), emphasised that anatomical variations do not necessarily cause breastfeeding difficulties. The report describes symptomatic ankyloglossia in relation to a restrictive frenulum and feeding difficulties that have not improved with appropriate lactation support.

This distinction matters because feeding involves more than oral anatomy. Infant tongue movement and coordination, milk transfer, positioning, the feeding person's comfort and milk supply where relevant may all contribute to the feeding experience.

A visible frenulum may be present without significant functional difficulty, while another infant may experience restricted tongue movement that contributes to feeding problems. The appearance of the frenulum alone cannot explain the whole feeding picture.

Anatomy provides information; function provides context. Considering both alongside the experience of the feeding dyad helps distinguish an anatomical finding from a clinically significant functional difficulty.

2. Assessment tools are under scrutiny, but no single tool provides a diagnosis

Several assessment tools have been developed to describe the appearance of the lingual frenulum and the function of the infant's tongue. These include the Hazelbaker Assessment Tool for Lingual Frenulum Function (HATLFF), the Bristol Tongue Assessment Tool (BTAT), its pictorial version TABBY, and the Lingual Frenulum Protocol for Infants (LFPI).

Necus et al. (2025) conducted a systematic review of assessment of tongue structure and function in infants. The review identified variation in the features assessed and in the evidence supporting the reliability and validity of different tools. The authors highlighted limitations in the evidence base and the need for more consistent assessment and reporting.

The LFPI assesses structural and functional features together, which makes it relevant to discussions about comprehensive assessment. However, the available evidence does not establish that one tool produces better clinical outcomes than all alternatives. A tool's comprehensiveness should not be confused with proof of superior diagnostic accuracy or improved feeding outcomes.

The AAP report also notes the lack of universally accepted diagnostic criteria for ankyloglossia (Thomas et al., 2024). Assessment tools can help organise observations and support consistency, but a score should not independently determine whether frenulotomy is indicated.

Diagnosis and decisions about surgical release require a comprehensive assessment by the practitioner providing the procedure. This should include examination of tongue motility, observation of feeding, relevant history-taking and consideration of the feeding dyad.

This matters because a tool may identify anatomical or functional features without establishing that those features are responsible for the feeding difficulties described. Equally, a score should not replace clinical judgement or consideration of other possible explanations.

Further research is needed to establish how consistently different assessment tools are used, how well they perform in different settings and whether their use improves outcomes for infants and families.

3. Bottle-feeding deserves greater attention in tongue-tie research

Much of the public discussion and research surrounding tongue-tie has focused on breastfeeding. However, feeding difficulties are not limited to breastfeeding, and families may seek assessment because of concerns about bottle-feeding.

The NHS provides information specifically addressing tongue-tie and bottle-feeding. It describes difficulties that may include prolonged feeds, milk loss from the mouth, difficulty maintaining feeding and concerns about weight gain. These experiences warrant consideration, but none is specific to tongue-tie and each can have other explanations (NHS, 2023).

Chinnadurai et al. (2015) reviewed evidence about treatment of ankyloglossia for reasons other than breastfeeding. Their systematic review found that the evidence for several non-breastfeeding outcomes was limited, illustrating the wider problem of drawing firm conclusions from small or methodologically weak studies.

The Association of Tongue-tie Practitioners (ATP) has also published a bottle-feeding audit. Audit findings can contribute useful information about clinical experiences and reported outcomes, but an audit is not equivalent to a controlled study. Its interpretation depends on how information was collected, which cases were included and how outcomes were measured.

Research specifically designed around bottle-feeding is needed. This includes consistent definitions of feeding difficulties, validated outcome measures and follow-up that considers whether any changes are meaningful to the infant and family.

4. Frenulotomy outcomes remain an important area of uncertainty

Frenulotomy is a procedure in which the lingual frenulum is divided to reduce restriction. Research has investigated outcomes including maternal nipple pain, breastfeeding self-efficacy, infant feeding, milk transfer and weight gain.

Some studies report improvements following the procedure, particularly in maternal nipple pain. However, study design and outcome measurement vary, and not all reported improvements can be confidently attributed to the procedure itself.

Silva et al. (2026) published an umbrella review of systematic reviews examining lingual frenotomy in infants up to one year of age. Fifteen systematic reviews were included. Using the AMSTAR 2 assessment, the authors classified 14 reviews as having critically low confidence and one as having moderate confidence.

The authors concluded that the underlying reviews had substantial methodological limitations. Their findings highlight the difficulty of drawing firm conclusions about the benefits of frenotomy across breastfeeding-related outcomes.

These findings do not establish that no infant benefits from frenulotomy. They indicate that the strength of evidence differs between outcomes and that current research cannot provide a simple answer for every feeding difficulty.

It is also important to distinguish between a change reported after a procedure and a change demonstrated to result from that procedure. Feeding may change over time for several reasons, including infant maturation, feeding support, changes in positioning and the natural course of the original difficulty.

5. Long-term outcomes are not established

Families sometimes encounter claims that tongue-tie division may prevent later speech difficulties, sleep-disordered breathing or other problems. These are important questions, but the evidence needs to support the specific outcome being claimed.

Thomas et al. (2024) concluded that frenotomy to prevent future speech articulation difficulties or obstructive sleep apnoea is not evidence-based. This does not mean that every possible relationship between tongue function and later development has been fully investigated. It means that preventive benefits from infant frenulotomy have not been established.

Speech development involves multiple factors, and a restriction observed in infancy does not necessarily predict a later speech disorder. Similarly, an association between oral anatomy and sleep-related symptoms would not, on its own, demonstrate that releasing a frenulum in infancy prevents those symptoms.

Research with longer follow-up, appropriate comparison groups and clearly defined outcomes would be needed to establish whether early frenulotomy changes these longer-term outcomes.

For families, a proposed future benefit should therefore be distinguished from a current, identifiable functional difficulty.

6. Objective measures of feeding are being explored

Feeding assessment often includes observation of the infant and the feeding person's experience. Researchers are also exploring whether objective measurements can provide additional information about feeding mechanics and changes following frenulotomy.

Siggaard, Rytter and Lildholdt (2026) investigated an electronic baby bottle designed to record intraoral forces during sucking. Their prospective study included 106 infants under three months of age, assessed at baseline and one week later. Eighty-five infants underwent frenotomy, while 21 infants who did not meet the study's diagnostic criteria formed a comparison group.

The electronic bottle received favourable subjective ratings from clinicians, but the study did not identify a significant change in the device's signal following frenotomy. The authors concluded that subjective interpretation of its readings was insufficient as a standalone diagnostic approach and that further validation was needed.

This study illustrates the difference between developing a measurement method and establishing its clinical value. An objective measurement may help researchers describe sucking patterns, but it must be shown to measure something meaningful and reliably distinguish relevant clinical differences.

A change in a feeding parameter also needs to be interpreted alongside the infant's feeding experience, growth and coordination, as well as the family's experience of feeding.

Future research could combine objective feeding measurements with validated clinical assessments and family-reported outcomes. This would help establish whether measured changes correspond to improvements that matter in everyday feeding.

7. A multidisciplinary approach recognises the complexity of feeding

Infant feeding is not explained by oral anatomy alone. It involves the infant's oral movement and coordination, the feeding person's comfort and milk supply where relevant, feeding technique and the wider circumstances of the feeding dyad.

A multidisciplinary approach can bring different perspectives to the same feeding experience.

A practitioner providing surgical release is responsible for assessing whether a restrictive frenulum is present, whether the findings are consistent with the reported difficulties and whether a procedure is appropriate. The assessment includes consideration of relevant history, tongue movement and observed feeding.

An International Board Certified Lactation Consultant (IBCLC) can provide specialist assessment and support around breastfeeding and lactation. This may include attachment, positioning, milk transfer, milk supply, nipple pain and the feeding person's experience. Lactation support may also help identify factors that could contribute to feeding difficulties independently of tongue-tie.

Other infant-feeding specialists may contribute according to their training and scope of practice. Bodywork practitioners may work with aspects of muscular tension or movement, depending on their approach, qualifications and the individual circumstances. However, the evidence varies between bodywork approaches, and findings about one method should not automatically be applied to another.

Thomas et al. (2024) emphasised the importance of a team approach and collaboration with lactation professionals when assessing breastfeeding difficulties. The value of multidisciplinary care lies in recognising that different practitioners may contribute different forms of expertise, rather than assuming that one intervention addresses every contributing factor.

This does not mean that every family requires every type of support. The appropriate involvement depends on the infant's needs, the feeding difficulties and the findings of assessment.

8. Pain management is part of the procedure and aftercare discussion

Pain associated with frenulotomy and the period following the procedure is an important consideration for families. Practices vary, and the evidence supporting different approaches to pain management is not equally strong.

The infant's age, the procedure performed, the clinical setting and the method used to assess pain can affect the available evidence. Studies may also measure pain in different ways, making direct comparisons difficult.

It is important to distinguish between discomfort associated with the procedure itself and feeding changes or distress that may occur afterwards. These experiences may have several possible explanations and should not automatically be attributed to a single cause.

Thomas et al. (2024) emphasised discussing pain control, procedural risks, alternatives and postoperative care as part of informed consent. Clear information can help families understand what to expect and when further assessment may be needed.

Further research using consistent pain measures and appropriate comparison groups would help clarify the effectiveness of different approaches.

9. Bleeding risk, complications and emergency care

Bleeding is a recognised complication of frenulotomy, and procedural safety is an important part of informed consent. The ATP publishes audit data on complications following tongue-tie division, alongside separate guidance on the management of prolonged bleeding.

The ATP's Report on the ATP audit of divisions performed in 2025 received 46 responses and covered 8,061 procedures. The report recorded the following findings:

• Five ambulance calls, equivalent to approximately 0.06% of the 8,061 procedures. Each respondent who reported calling an ambulance had done so once.

• One baby was reported as having been transferred in.

• Four babies required medical intervention for bleeding, including topical medication such as adrenaline or tranexamic acid, cautery or suturing.

• No confirmed infections related to division were reported.

• Five recurrences were reported as having been redivided elsewhere.

• One baby developed cysts.

• One respondent reported that three babies were not achieving full feeds one week after division.

These findings provide a recent UK practitioner-audit perspective on reported complications. However, the audit reflects the responses received rather than necessarily capturing every procedure performed in the UK. The 46 responses should not be interpreted as 46 individual practitioners unless the report confirms that each response came from a different practitioner. The findings also depend on the information submitted by respondents.

The five ambulance calls and four cases requiring medical intervention for bleeding are different outcomes and should not be combined. The figure of approximately 0.06% is a calculation from the number of reported ambulance calls divided by the number of procedures covered by the audit. It should not be interpreted as a definitive risk estimate for every infant undergoing frenulotomy.

The ATP's bleeding-management guidance should be considered separately from the annual audit. The guidance includes a management flow chart updated in 2025. It provides information for managing prolonged bleeding, but it should not be confused with a controlled trial comparing treatment approaches.

Vitamin K status is also relevant to procedural safety. Vitamin K helps blood clot normally, and vitamin K deficiency bleeding can be serious. The infant's vitamin K history therefore forms part of the wider safety considerations around a procedure.

Audit data, professional guidance and individual clinical assessment each contribute different information. Together, they help describe complications reported in practice while highlighting the importance of accurate records, clear escalation pathways and continued review of safety data.

10. Postoperative exercises and wound management remain debated

Aftercare following frenulotomy is an area of continuing discussion. Approaches vary, particularly around whether the wound should be manipulated or stretched, how frequently exercises are advised and what outcomes are expected.

Smart, Grant and Tseng (2025) published a scoping review of preoperative and postoperative care following surgery for ankyloglossia. The authors identified substantial variation in the care protocols studied and concluded that the evidence base was limited by inconsistent approaches and study methods.

Miller et al. (2025) investigated stretching exercises after infant frenotomy in a prospective interventional study involving 88 infants. There were 63 infants in the stretching group and 25 in the non-stretching group. Of those assigned to stretching, 36 were adherent to the exercises and 27 were not.

The authors reported differences in recurrent ankyloglossia, persistent feeding difficulties and revision procedures between the groups, with outcomes differing according to adherence. These findings contribute to the debate, but the study was conducted at a single centre and its group allocation and adherence patterns need to be considered when interpreting the results. The findings do not establish that every infant requires the same regimen.

Valle-Del Barrio et al. (2025) studied 212 neonates following frenotomy. All families were advised to undertake postoperative exercises, and infants were reassessed after the procedure. The authors reported that 30 infants underwent a second frenotomy. Because all families were advised to undertake exercises and there was no group that did not receive them, the study cannot independently establish whether exercises prevented readhesion.

The ATP's position statement on disruptive wound management also discusses uncertainty around postoperative wound manipulation. It notes that published evidence has not established which approach achieves optimal healing or reliably prevents the need for redivision.

It is important to distinguish between exercises intended to support oral movement and practices that repeatedly disturb the healing wound. These are not necessarily the same intervention, and research findings about one approach should not automatically be applied to another.

The current evidence does not establish a single universally appropriate postoperative regimen. Further robust studies are needed to compare clearly defined approaches, measure adherence, monitor adverse effects and follow infants long enough to assess meaningful outcomes.

11. Readhesion and healing need careful interpretation

Scar formation, readhesion and recurrent functional restriction are related topics, but they are not interchangeable. Healing tissue can change in appearance and texture, while readhesion describes the return of a connection or restriction following division. An anatomical finding does not automatically establish that feeding function has deteriorated.

Valle-Del Barrio et al. (2025) reported readhesion-related outcomes following neonatal frenotomy, including the number of infants who underwent a second procedure. Their study contributes information about what happened in one clinical cohort, but its observational design and lack of a comparison group not receiving exercises limit the conclusions that can be drawn about prevention.

Miller et al. (2025) also examined recurrent ankyloglossia and revision procedures in relation to postoperative stretching. Their findings add to the evidence under discussion, but the study's design and adherence patterns mean that the results should not be treated as a definitive answer for all infants or all aftercare approaches.

More research is needed to define clinically meaningful readhesion, distinguish anatomical findings from recurrent functional difficulties and establish which interventions, if any, improve outcomes without causing unnecessary pain or distress.

12. Hypermobility and connective-tissue conditions are being explored

The relationship between connective-tissue conditions and oral anatomy is another area of interest. Families may encounter information linking tongue-tie with hypermobility or conditions such as Ehlers-Danlos syndrome (EDS).

Savasta et al. (2021) reported a retrospective study comparing 40 children with EDS with 170 controls. The authors found a higher prevalence of absent or hypoplastic lingual frenulum in the EDS group.

The study raises questions about the relationship between connective-tissue characteristics and the development or appearance of the lingual frenulum. However, it does not establish how these anatomical findings relate to feeding function or whether frenulotomy would benefit an individual child.

The absence of a visible or typical frenulum does not necessarily establish that tongue movement is unrestricted, just as a visible frenulum does not automatically demonstrate functional restriction. The clinical significance of anatomical findings needs to be assessed rather than assumed.

The study was retrospective and relatively small. Further research is needed before drawing broader conclusions about feeding outcomes, assessment or treatment in children with connective-tissue conditions.

13. Lip-tie and buccal-tie release remain controversial

Families may encounter claims that the upper labial frenulum, commonly called the lip-tie, or the buccal frenula contribute to breastfeeding or bottle-feeding difficulties. These claims need to be considered in the context of the available evidence.

The presence of a visible upper labial frenulum is common and does not, on its own, establish a feeding problem. Nakhash et al. (2019) reviewed the literature on upper lip-tie and breastfeeding. They found no randomised controlled trials and concluded that the evidence supporting routine release in infants with breastfeeding difficulties was poor. They also noted that the commonly used Kotlow classification had not been shown to reliably predict breastfeeding difficulty.

The American Academy of Otolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery clinical consensus statement on ankyloglossia in children discusses the lack of evidence for buccal frenulum release and reached consensus against releasing buccal frenula to improve breastfeeding (Messner et al., 2020).

The ATP's 2026 position statement on lip-tie and buccal-tie similarly notes that published evidence does not establish a link between these structures and breastfeeding or bottle-feeding difficulties, and that evidence supporting buccal frenulum release for these concerns is lacking.

It is important to distinguish normal oral anatomy from evidence that a structure is causing a functional difficulty. Claims that a release will improve feeding need to be supported by evidence specific to that procedure and outcome.

14. Preventive frenulotomy is not supported by established evidence

Another question is whether frenulotomy should be performed in infancy to prevent possible difficulties later in life, even when a current functional problem has not been established.

This is different from considering a procedure where an infant has a restrictive frenulum and an assessment identifies associated functional difficulties. Preventive treatment requires evidence that the intervention reduces the likelihood of a future problem and that the expected benefit outweighs the risks and burdens of treatment.

Thomas et al. (2024) concluded that frenotomy to prevent future speech articulation difficulties or obstructive sleep apnoea is not evidence-based. The absence of strong evidence for these proposed preventive benefits means that they should not be presented to families as established outcomes.

Research into longer-term outcomes remains important, but uncertainty about future risk is not the same as evidence that a procedure will prevent it. Decisions about treatment are best understood in relation to current function, assessment findings and the evidence for the specific outcome being considered.

15. Professional guidance, audits and research each contribute different evidence

Research papers are only one part of the information available to families and practitioners. Professional position statements, clinical guidance and audit reports can also contribute to understanding current practice and the questions that remain unresolved.

These sources serve different purposes. A systematic review evaluates findings across studies, although its conclusions depend on the quality of the underlying research. A clinical report or guideline sets out recommendations based on available evidence and professional judgement. A position statement explains an organisation's view on a particular issue. An audit describes information collected about practice or outcomes, but it may not establish cause and effect.

The ATP's annual complications audits are valuable because they provide recurring information about complications reported by participating practitioners. The 2025 audit, covering 8,061 procedures across 46 responses, adds recent data to the discussion of procedural safety. However, the findings should be interpreted with the audit's response numbers and reporting methods in mind.

Similarly, the ATP's bleeding guidance and position statement on disruptive wound management provide information about current professional approaches, but they should not be confused with controlled trials demonstrating the superiority of one intervention.

No single source answers every question about tongue-tie. Understanding the evidence requires attention to study design, sample size, follow-up, the outcomes measured and whether the findings are relevant to the particular infant and feeding difficulty being considered.

16. What the evidence means for families

Research into tongue-tie is continuing to develop. Some findings support the possibility of benefit from frenulotomy for particular feeding-related outcomes, while other proposed benefits remain uncertain or unsupported by sufficiently robust evidence.

Several themes are consistent across the literature:

• The appearance of the lingual frenulum alone cannot establish whether it is functionally restrictive.

• Assessment tools can support the assessment process, but a score is not a diagnosis.

• Feeding difficulties need to be understood in the context of the infant and feeding dyad.

• Evidence relating to breastfeeding is more developed than evidence for bottle-feeding, and important gaps remain.

• Improvements reported after frenulotomy should be interpreted in the context of study design and other factors that may influence feeding.

• Evidence for long-term preventive benefits remains limited.

• Postoperative exercises and wound management remain areas of debate, with uncertainty about which approaches produce the best outcomes.

• Annual audits contribute useful information about reported complications, but they are not substitutes for well-designed studies with consistent outcome measures and follow-up.

For families, the aim is not to find one paper that provides a definitive answer for every infant. It is to understand what the evidence can and cannot tell us, how it relates to the feeding difficulties being experienced and what other factors may be relevant.

A balanced discussion recognises both the potential for benefit and the limitations of current knowledge. It also recognises that feeding is a relationship between an infant and their caregiver, and that the most useful assessment considers function, experience and context alongside anatomy.

References

Association of Tongue-tie Practitioners (ATP) (2022) Position statement: Disruptive wound management. Available at: https://www.tongue-tie.org.uk/position-statements (Accessed: 24 October 2026).

Association of Tongue-tie Practitioners (ATP) (2025a) Report on the ATP audit of divisions performed in 2025. Available at: https://irp.cdn-website.com/f3c762d5/files/uploaded/Report+on+the+ATP+audit+of+divisions+performed+in+2025.pdf (Accessed: 24 October 2026).

Association of Tongue-tie Practitioners (ATP) (2025b) Management of prolonged bleeding post tongue-tie division: flow chart 2025. Available at: https://www.tongue-tie.org.uk/bleeding-guidelines (Accessed: 24 October 2026).

Association of Tongue-tie Practitioners (ATP) (2026) Position statement: Lip-tie and buccal-tie. Available at: https://www.tongue-tie.org.uk/position-statements (Accessed: 24 October 2026).

Chinnadurai, S., Francis, D.O., Epstein, R.A., Morad, A., Kohanim, S. and McPheeters, M. (2015) ‘Treatment of ankyloglossia for reasons other than breastfeeding: a systematic review’, Pediatrics, 135(6), pp. e1467–e1474. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2015-0660.

Messner, A.H. et al. (2020) ‘Clinical consensus statement: ankyloglossia in children’, Otolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery, 162(5), pp. 597–611. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1177/0194599820915457.

Miller, J.E., Chung, H.R., Marshall, C.R., Wilhalme, H.M. and West, A.N. (2025) ‘Outcomes of stretching exercises after lingual frenotomy in infants: a prospective, interventional study’, International Journal of Pediatric Otorhinolaryngology, 191, article 112280. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijporl.2025.112280.

Mills, N. et al. (2020) ‘Imaging the breastfeeding swallow: pilot study utilizing real-time MRI’, Laryngoscope Investigative Otolaryngology, 5(3), pp. 572–579. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1002/lio2.397.

Nakhash, R., Wasserteil, N., Mimouni, F.B., Kasirer, Y.M., Hammerman, C. and Bin-Nun, A. (2019) ‘Upper lip tie and breastfeeding: a systematic review’, Breastfeeding Medicine, 14(2), pp. 83–87. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1089/bfm.2018.0174.

National Health Service (NHS) (2023) Tongue-tie and bottle feeding. Available at: https://www.nhs.uk/best-start-in-life/baby/feeding-your-baby/bottle-feeding/bottle-feeding-challenges/tongue-tie-and-bottle-feeding/ (Accessed: 24 October 2026).

Necus, E., Claessen, M., Hennessey, N. and Smart, S. (2025) ‘Assessment of tongue structure and function in infants for the diagnosis of ankyloglossia: a systematic review’, International Journal of Pediatric Otorhinolaryngology, 196, article 112485. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijporl.2025.112485.

Savasta, S. et al. (2021) ‘Absence of lingual frenulum in children with Ehlers-Danlos syndrome: a retrospective study of forty cases and literature review of a twenty years long debate’, Minerva Pediatrica, 73(3), pp. 230–235. Available at: https://doi.org/10.23736/S2724-5276.19.05530-0.

Siggaard, L.D., Rytter, D. and Lildholdt, T. (2026) ‘Using the electronic baby bottle to support tongue-tie diagnosis in infants: a prospective study’, Acta Oto-Laryngologica. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1080/00016489.2026.2688878.

Silva, B.V. da, Barollo, A.V., Sá, N. da N.L., Oliveira, L.B. and Sanglard, L.F. (2026) ‘Lingual frenotomy in breastfeeding infants: an umbrella review’, International Journal of Paediatric Dentistry, 36(1), pp. 90–104. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1111/ipd.70031.

Smart, S., Grant, H. and Tseng, R.J. (2025) ‘Beyond surgery: pre- and post-operative care in children with ankyloglossia’, International Journal of Paediatric Dentistry, 35(2), pp. 318–338. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1111/ipd.13235.

Thomas, J. et al. (2024) ‘Identification and management of ankyloglossia and its effect on breastfeeding in infants: clinical report’, Pediatrics, 154(2), article e2024067605. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2024-067605.

Valle-Del Barrio, B., Maya-Enero, S., Prat-Ortells, J., López-Vílchez, M.Á. and Candel-Pau, J. (2025) ‘Readhesion of tongue-tie following neonatal frenotomy: incidence and impact of postoperative exercises in a prospective observational study’, Children, 12(8), article 971. Available at: https://doi.org/10.3390/children12080971.