OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the influence of low-level laser therapy (LLLT) on the prevention and treatment of oral mucositis (OM) in pediatric cancer patients takingmethotrexate. BACKGROUND DATA: OM is a very common, potentially severe side effect, caused by treatment with radiotherapy and chemotherapy for cancer. METHODS:Forty patients with acute lymphoblastic leukemia, who received high doses of methotrexate, were distributed into two groups. Group A (Preventive Group) was composed of patients who received preventive laser (red-subgroup A1 or infrared-subgroup A2) for 5 days, beginning on the 1st day of infusion. Group B (Treatment Group) was composed of patients who received laser treatment only if they developed post-chemotherapy mucositis (red-subgroup B1 or infrared-subgroup B2). Laser was used at wavelengths of 660 or 830 nm with output 100 mW, power density 3.57 W/cm(2), spot size 0.028 cm(2), energy of 1 J, resulting in an energy density of 35 J/cm(2) for 10 sec in the prophylactic group, and energy of 2 J, resulting in energy density of 70 J/cm(2) for 20 sec in the therapeutic group. RESULTS: The percentage of patients who did not develop OM was higher in Group A (60% vs. 25%). In Group B, 3/20 patients developed grade IV OM (15%), and a significant difference was found between the two subgroups at the end of treatment (p=0.019). CONCLUSIONS:Prophylactic laser produced a better outcome than when patients did not receive any preventive intervention, and red laser (660 nm) was better than infrared (830 nm) in the prevention and treatment of OM.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the influence of low-level laser therapy (LLLT) on the prevention and treatment of oral mucositis (OM) in pediatric cancerpatients taking methotrexate. BACKGROUND DATA: OM is a very common, potentially severe side effect, caused by treatment with radiotherapy and chemotherapy for cancer. METHODS: Forty patients with acute lymphoblastic leukemia, who received high doses of methotrexate, were distributed into two groups. Group A (Preventive Group) was composed of patients who received preventive laser (red-subgroup A1 or infrared-subgroup A2) for 5 days, beginning on the 1st day of infusion. Group B (Treatment Group) was composed of patients who received laser treatment only if they developed post-chemotherapy mucositis (red-subgroup B1 or infrared-subgroup B2). Laser was used at wavelengths of 660 or 830 nm with output 100 mW, power density 3.57 W/cm(2), spot size 0.028 cm(2), energy of 1 J, resulting in an energy density of 35 J/cm(2) for 10 sec in the prophylactic group, and energy of 2 J, resulting in energy density of 70 J/cm(2) for 20 sec in the therapeutic group. RESULTS: The percentage of patients who did not develop OM was higher in Group A (60% vs. 25%). In Group B, 3/20 patients developed grade IV OM (15%), and a significant difference was found between the two subgroups at the end of treatment (p=0.019). CONCLUSIONS: Prophylactic laser produced a better outcome than when patients did not receive any preventive intervention, and red laser (660 nm) was better than infrared (830 nm) in the prevention and treatment of OM.
Authors: Yehuda Zadik; Praveen R Arany; Eduardo Rodrigues Fregnani; Paolo Bossi; Héliton Spindola Antunes; René-Jean Bensadoun; Luiz Alcino Gueiros; Alessandra Majorana; Raj G Nair; Vinisha Ranna; Wim J E Tissing; Anusha Vaddi; Rachel Lubart; Cesar Augusto Migliorati; Rajesh V Lalla; Karis Kin Fong Cheng; Sharon Elad Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2019-07-08 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: Aurigena Antunes de Araújo; Hugo Varela; Caroline Addison Carvalho Xavier de Medeiros; Gerly Anne de Castro Brito; Kênio Costa de Lima; Ligia Moreno de Moura; Raimundo Fernandes de Araújo Júnior Journal: PLoS One Date: 2015-02-17 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Jolien Robijns; Raj G Nair; Joy Lodewijckx; Praveen Arany; Andrei Barasch; Jan M Bjordal; Paolo Bossi; Anne Chilles; Patricia M Corby; Joel B Epstein; Sharon Elad; Reza Fekrazad; Eduardo Rodrigues Fregnani; Marie-Thérèse Genot; Ana M C Ibarra; Michael R Hamblin; Vladimir Heiskanen; Ken Hu; Jean Klastersky; Rajesh Lalla; Sofia Latifian; Arun Maiya; Jeroen Mebis; Cesar A Migliorati; Dan M J Milstein; Barbara Murphy; Judith E Raber-Durlacher; Hendrik J Roseboom; Stephen Sonis; Nathaniel Treister; Yehuda Zadik; René-Jean Bensadoun Journal: Front Oncol Date: 2022-08-30 Impact factor: 5.738
Authors: Alessandro Leite Cavalcanti; Dário José de Macêdo; Fernanda Suely Barros Dantas; Karla Dos Santos Menezes; Diego Filipe Bezerra Silva; William Alves de Melo Junior; Alidianne Fabia Cabral Cavalcanti Journal: J Clin Med Date: 2018-04-24 Impact factor: 4.241