BACKGROUND: Energy density and exposure time reciprocity is assumed and routinely used in low-level light therapy (LLLT) regimens. This study examined dose reciprocity effects on wound healing. METHODS: Pressure ulcers were created on seven groups of C57/BL mice (n = 18). Photoradiation was administered (18 days; 5 J/cm(2)/day @ 670 nm) using a custom LED apparatus and treatment matrix varying both intensity and exposure. Control animals were treated similarly, without photoradiation. Ulcer staging was performed using a standardized scale. Changes in stage, wound area and wound closure rates were measured. Histology was performed. RESULTS: Photostimulatory effects at day 7 occurred with parameters of 125 seconds @ 40 mW x 1/day; 625 seconds @ 8 mWx1/day; 62.5 seconds @ 40 mWx2/day; and 312.5 seconds @ 8 mWx2/day; and at day 18 using 625 seconds @ 8 mW and 312.5 seconds @ 8 mWx2/day. Statistically significant increases in wound closure rates occurred using 625 seconds @ 8 mW; 62.5 seconds @ 40 mWx2/day; and 312.5 seconds @ 8 mWx2/day treatments. Mean ulcer grade scores were similar to controls. CONCLUSIONS: Varying irradiance and exposure time to achieve a specified energy density affects phototherapy outcomes in this model. Variation of exposure time and irradiance may account for conflicting results in the literature. Further studies of these effects are warranted. (c) 2007 Wiley-Liss, Inc.
BACKGROUND: Energy density and exposure time reciprocity is assumed and routinely used in low-level light therapy (LLLT) regimens. This study examined dose reciprocity effects on wound healing. METHODS: Pressure ulcers were created on seven groups of C57/BL mice (n = 18). Photoradiation was administered (18 days; 5 J/cm(2)/day @ 670 nm) using a custom LED apparatus and treatment matrix varying both intensity and exposure. Control animals were treated similarly, without photoradiation. Ulcer staging was performed using a standardized scale. Changes in stage, wound area and wound closure rates were measured. Histology was performed. RESULTS: Photostimulatory effects at day 7 occurred with parameters of 125 seconds @ 40 mW x 1/day; 625 seconds @ 8 mWx1/day; 62.5 seconds @ 40 mWx2/day; and 312.5 seconds @ 8 mWx2/day; and at day 18 using 625 seconds @ 8 mW and 312.5 seconds @ 8 mWx2/day. Statistically significant increases in wound closure rates occurred using 625 seconds @ 8 mW; 62.5 seconds @ 40 mWx2/day; and 312.5 seconds @ 8 mWx2/day treatments. Mean ulcer grade scores were similar to controls. CONCLUSIONS: Varying irradiance and exposure time to achieve a specified energy density affects phototherapy outcomes in this model. Variation of exposure time and irradiance may account for conflicting results in the literature. Further studies of these effects are warranted. (c) 2007 Wiley-Liss, Inc.
Authors: Hoon Chung; Tianhong Dai; Sulbha K Sharma; Ying-Ying Huang; James D Carroll; Michael R Hamblin Journal: Ann Biomed Eng Date: 2011-11-02 Impact factor: 3.934
Authors: Sherif A Mohamad; Michael R Milward; Mohammed A Hadis; Sarah A Kuehne; Paul R Cooper Journal: Photochem Photobiol Sci Date: 2021-05-04 Impact factor: 3.982
Authors: Cristiano S Baldan; Igor Fb Masson; Ivaldo Esteves Júnior; Alessandra Maria S Baldan; Aline F P Machado; Raquel A Casaroto; Richard E Liebano Journal: Plast Surg (Oakv) Date: 2015 Impact factor: 0.947
Authors: Jolien Robijns; Sandrine Censabella; Stefan Claes; Luc Pannekoeke; Lore Bussé; Dora Colson; Iris Kaminski; Joy Lodewijckx; Paul Bulens; Annelies Maes; Leen Noé; Marc Brosens; An Timmermans; Ivo Lambrichts; Veerle Somers; Jeroen Mebis Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2018-10-01 Impact factor: 3.603