BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Over the last few decades, many studies have focused on the effect of lasers on the management of oral mucositis in oncologic patients treated with chemotherapy and/or radiotherapy. However, the effect of light-emitting diode (LED) has been poorly studied, and was not compared with that of laser phototherapy (LPT). For this reason, the aim of the present study was to clinically compare the effect of these two therapies on chemotherapy-induced oral mucositis (CIOM) and pain. METHODS: Forty patients with CIOM were divided into two groups: G1, patients treated with LPT; G2, patients treated with LED. The treatment was administered during 10 consecutive days, with exception of weekends. LPT was applied using an InGaAlP laser (660 nm/40 mW/6.6 J cm-(2)/0.24 J per point/0.036 cm(2) of spot size). LED phototherapy was applied using 0.24 J per point/80 mW/630 nm/1 cm(2) of spot size. CIOM was assessed during each session in accordance to the World Health Organization (WHO) score. The patient self-assessed pain was scored on a visual analog scale (VAS). RESULTS: The mean VAS and WHO scores were significantly smaller in the LED group (p<0.05). However, both groups required the same number of days to reach score zero for mucositis and pain (p>0.05). Moreover, in the group with severe mucositis (score III), there was a lower frequency of patients with complete healing and pain relief, with the exception of analgesia in G2, in which almost all patients were completely relieved from pain. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that LED therapy is more effective than LPT in the treatment of COIM, with the parameters used in the present study.
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Over the last few decades, many studies have focused on the effect of lasers on the management of oral mucositis in oncologic patients treated with chemotherapy and/or radiotherapy. However, the effect of light-emitting diode (LED) has been poorly studied, and was not compared with that of laser phototherapy (LPT). For this reason, the aim of the present study was to clinically compare the effect of these two therapies on chemotherapy-induced oral mucositis (CIOM) and pain. METHODS: Forty patients with CIOM were divided into two groups: G1, patients treated with LPT; G2, patients treated with LED. The treatment was administered during 10 consecutive days, with exception of weekends. LPT was applied using an InGaAlP laser (660 nm/40 mW/6.6 J cm-(2)/0.24 J per point/0.036 cm(2) of spot size). LED phototherapy was applied using 0.24 J per point/80 mW/630 nm/1 cm(2) of spot size. CIOM was assessed during each session in accordance to the World Health Organization (WHO) score. The patient self-assessed pain was scored on a visual analog scale (VAS). RESULTS: The mean VAS and WHO scores were significantly smaller in the LED group (p<0.05). However, both groups required the same number of days to reach score zero for mucositis and pain (p>0.05). Moreover, in the group with severe mucositis (score III), there was a lower frequency of patients with complete healing and pain relief, with the exception of analgesia in G2, in which almost all patients were completely relieved from pain. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that LED therapy is more effective than LPT in the treatment of COIM, with the parameters used in the present study.
Authors: Betânia Ferreira; Fabiana Moura da Motta Silveira; Flávia Augusta de Orange Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2015-08-07 Impact factor: 3.603
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: Douglas Magno Guimaraes; Tamara Melo Nunes Ota; Diego Assunção Calixto Da Silva; Fabio De Lucas Da Silva Almeida; Tatiana Dias Schalch; Alessandro Melo Deana; Jose Miguel Alves Junior; Kristianne Porta Santos Fernandes Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2021-04-24 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: Fernando Anschau; Jacqueline Webster; Marcelo Eduardo Zanella Capra; André Luis Ferreira de Azeredo da Silva; Airton Tetelbom Stein Journal: Lasers Med Sci Date: 2019-02-07 Impact factor: 3.161