Your new experience awaits. Try the new design now and help us make it even better

OPINION article

Front. Pediatr., 08 December 2025

Sec. Children and Health

Volume 13 - 2025 | https://doi.org/10.3389/fped.2025.1702138

Evaluating the efficacy of frenotomy in breastfeeding success: a review of current guidelines and outcomes


Kennedy A. Sabharwal
Kennedy A. Sabharwal1*Michael W. Simon
Michael W. Simon2
  • 1College of Medicine, University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY, United States
  • 2Department of Pediatrics, University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY, United States

A new mom struggles with breastfeeding. Painful latching leads to Google, then tongue-tie Facebook groups where surgery seems like the obvious answer. Within days, she is scheduled for frenotomy with minimal evaluation of positioning, latch issues, or other common breastfeeding problems. This happens constantly now. Between 1997 and 2012, ankyloglossia diagnoses jumped nearly ten-fold along with frenotomy procedures (1). What used to be managed with positioning help and lactation support now defaults to surgery.

We have expanded surgical indications beyond tongue frenotomy to lip and cheek procedures, despite weak evidence. Traditional lactation support gets skipped for immediate surgical referrals. The real question is not whether frenotomy helps short-term, it is whether we are massively overtreating something that usually resolves with good support.

The medical consensus is clear. The 2020 Academy of Otolaryngology review found unclear associations between breastfeeding problems and lip ties, recommending non-medical management first (2). The AAP agrees, lactation support must be pursued before surgery (3). The data on frenotomy outcomes is mixed at best. Some studies show short-term improvements, but exclusive breastfeeding rates drop significantly between 2 weeks and 2 months post-procedure (4). Even studies showing benefits have wide variability and inconsistent outcome measures.

However, we must examine the studies that also advocate for frenotomy. Several randomized controlled trials have documented meaningful maternal improvements following frenotomy. One study found no objective improvement in breastfeeding success at 5 days or 8 weeks, but mothers reported significantly higher breastfeeding confidence and fewer switched to bottle feeding early (5). Earlier papers demonstrated reduced maternal nipple pain and improved infant latch scores, while another publication documented similar immediate pain relief (6, 7).

These positive findings represent real clinical benefit that can impact breastfeeding success and family wellbeing; however, few studies have examined whether symptom improvements translate into better long-term breastfeeding outcomes.

The positive literature suggests a subset of mothers and infants experience genuine benefit from frenotomy, particularly those with documented functional restriction and significant feeding difficulties despite adequate lactation support (8). Rather than dismissing this evidence, we believe the best approach involves using these findings to guide individualized decision-making.

Although there is insufficient evidence for lip and cheek frenectomy, these procedures are everywhere (2). Surgical indications have outpaced actual evidence. A study of 115 infants referred for tongue-tie surgery found 63% did not need the procedure (9). That is not statistical noise, that is systematic overdiagnosis.

The disparities tell the whole story. Kids with ankyloglossia diagnoses are more likely from higher-income areas, have private insurance, and live in the Midwest (1). Access to specialists, not medical necessity, drives who gets treated. Social media makes it worse. Tongue-tie awareness campaigns increase diagnoses and procedures (3). Parents show up expecting surgery instead of evaluation. Without standardized criteria or training requirements, providers make wildly different decisions for identical cases.

We do not know the long-term effects of early surgical intervention. Emerging evidence suggests risks like oral defensiveness, sensory feeding issues, and food restrictions (3). This matters because most tongue-tied babies end up breastfeeding fine without surgery. Good lactation support beats surgery for long-term success. Comprehensive approaches addressing positioning and ongoing guidance provide sustained benefits that surgery alone cannot match.

We must start with comprehensive lactation assessment, positioning help, and intensive support before even thinking about surgery. This matches professional guidelines and avoids potential complications. Providers need better training in ankyloglossia assessment and standardized criteria. Institutions need protocols that prioritize conservative management with clear thresholds for surgery based on actual functional problems, not just having a tongue-tie.

Parent education is huge. We need to counter social media misinformation by explaining that most breastfeeding difficulties come from positioning, latch problems, and maternal factors, not anatomy requiring surgery. Lactation support, not surgery, should be first-line for tongue-tie management. We need to resist the pressure for quick surgical fixes and actually address the complex reasons breastfeeding can be difficult. Frenotomy might help carefully selected patients with clear functional problems, but routine surgery is not justified by current evidence. The potential for complications plus systematic overdiagnosis demands we get back to evidence-based conservative care.

We need standardized criteria, better training, and patient education that counters social media hype. Most importantly, successful breastfeeding depends more on skilled support than surgical intervention. Our patients deserve evidence-based care, not social media trends.

Author contributions

KS: Formal analysis, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing. MS: Supervision, Writing – review & editing, Writing – original draft.

Funding

The author(s) declare no financial support was received for the research and/or publication of this article.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Generative AI statement

The author(s) declare that no Generative AI was used in the creation of this manuscript.

Any alternative text (alt text) provided alongside figures in this article has been generated by Frontiers with the support of artificial intelligence and reasonable efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, including review by the authors wherever possible. If you identify any issues, please contact us.

Publisher's note

All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

References

1. Walsh J, Links A, Boss E, Tunkel D. Ankyloglossia and lingual frenotomy: national trends in inpatient diagnosis and management in the United States, 1997-2012. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. (2017) 156(4):735–40. doi: 10.1177/0194599817690135

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

2. Messner AH, Walsh J, Rosenfeld RM, Schwartz SR, Ishman SL, Baldassari C, et al. Clinical consensus statement: ankyloglossia in children. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. (2020) 162(5):597–611. doi: 10.1177/0194599820915457

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

3. Thomas J, Bunik M, Holmes A, Keels MA, Poindexter B, Meyer A, et al. Identification and management of ankyloglossia and its effect on breastfeeding in infants: clinical report. Pediatrics. (2024) 154:e2024067605. doi: 10.1542/peds.2024-067605

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

4. Unger C, Chetwynd E, Costello R. Ankyloglossia identification, diagnosis, and frenotomy. J Hum Lact. (2019) 36(3):519–27. doi: 10.1177/0890334419887368

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

5. Emond A, Ingram J, Johnson D, Blair P, Whitelaw A, Copeland M, et al. Randomised controlled trial of early frenotomy in breast-fed infants with mild-moderate tongue-tie. Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed. (2014) 99(3):F189–95. doi: 10.1136/archdischild-2013-305031

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

6. Buryk M, Bloom D, Shope T. Efficacy of neonatal release of ankyloglossia: a randomized trial. Pediatrics. (2011) 128(2):280–8. doi: 10.1542/peds.2011-0077

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

7. Berry J, Griffiths M, Westcott C. A double-blind, randomized, controlled trial of tongue-tie division and its immediate effect on breastfeeding. Breastfeed Med. (2012) 7(3):189–93. doi: 10.1089/bfm.2011.0030

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

8. Brooks L, Landry A, Deshpande A, Marchica C, Cooley A, Raol N. Posterior tongue tie, base of tongue movement, and pharyngeal dysphagia: what is the connection? Dysphagia. (2020) 35(1):129–32. doi: 10.1007/s00455-019-10040-x

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

9. Caloway C, Hersh CJ, Baars R, Sally S, Diercks G, Hartnick CJ. Association of feeding evaluation with frenotomy rates in infants with breastfeeding difficulties. JAMA Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. (2019) 145(9):817–22. doi: 10.1001/jamaoto.2019.1696

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Keywords: ankyloglossia, tongue-tie, frenotomy, breastfeeding, frenectomy, lactation

Citation: Sabharwal KA and Simon MW (2025) Evaluating the efficacy of frenotomy in breastfeeding success: a review of current guidelines and outcomes. Front. Pediatr. 13:1702138. doi: 10.3389/fped.2025.1702138

Received: 25 September 2025; Revised: 13 November 2025;
Accepted: 21 November 2025;
Published: 8 December 2025.

Edited by:

Nicholas P. Hays, Nestle, Switzerland

Reviewed by:

Elien Rouw, Academy of Breastfeeding Medicine, United States

Copyright: © 2025 Sabharwal and Simon. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

*Correspondence: Kennedy A. Sabharwal, a3NhYmhhcndhbEB1dG1jay5lZHU=

Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.