Literature DB >> 26748691

A systematic review of low-level light therapy for treatment of diabetic foot ulcer.

Catherine N Tchanque-Fossuo1,2, Derek Ho1, Sara E Dahle2,3, Eugene Koo1, Chin-Shang Li4, R Rivkah Isseroff1,2, Jared Jagdeo1,2,5.   

Abstract

Diabetes mellitus (DM) is a significant international health concern affecting more than 387 million individuals. A diabetic person has a 25% lifetime risk of developing a diabetic foot ulcer (DFU), leading to limb amputation in up to one in six DFU patients. Low-level light therapy (LLLT) uses low-power lasers or light-emitting diodes to alter cellular function and molecular pathways, and may be a promising treatment for DFU. The goal of this systematic review is to examine whether the clinical use of LLLT is effective in the healing of DFU at 12 and 20 weeks in comparison with the standard of care, and to provide evidence-based recommendation and future clinical guidelines for the treatment of DFU using LLLT. On September 30, 2015, we searched PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, and Web of Science databases using the following terms: "diabetic foot" AND "low level light therapy," OR "light emitting diode," OR "phototherapy," OR "laser." The relevant articles that met the following criteria were selected for inclusion: randomized control trials (RCTs) that investigated the use of LLLT for treatment of DFU. Four RCTs involving 131 participants were suitable for inclusion based upon our criteria. The clinical trials used sham irriadiation, low dose, or nontherapeutic LLLT as placebo or control in comparison to LLLT. The endpoints included ulcer size and time to complete healing with follow-up ranging from 2 to 16 weeks. Each article was assigned a level of evidence (LOE) and graded according to the Oxford Center for Evidence-based Medicine Levels of Evidence Grades of Recommendation criteria. Limitations of reviewed RCTs include a small sample size (N < 100), unclear allocation concealment, lack of screening phase to exclude rapid healers, unclear inclusion/exclusion criteria, short (<30 days) follow-up period, and unclear treatment settings (wavelength and treatment time). However, all reviewed RCTs demonstrated therapeutic outcomes with no adverse events using LLLT for treatment of DFU. This systematic review reports that LLLT has significant potential to become a portable, minimally invasive, easy-to-use, and cost effective modality for treatment of DFU. To enthusiastically recommend LLLT for treatment of DFU, additional studies with comparable laser parameters, screening period to exclude rapid healers, larger sample sizes and longer follow-up periods are required. We envision future stringent RCTs may validate LLLT for treatment of DFU. Systematic review registration number: PROSPERO CRD42015029825.
© 2016 by the Wound Healing Society.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 26748691     DOI: 10.1111/wrr.12399

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Wound Repair Regen        ISSN: 1067-1927            Impact factor:   3.617


  11 in total

1.  A randomized controlled trial comparing helium-neon laser therapy and infrared laser therapy in patients with diabetic foot ulcer.

Authors:  Sayed A Tantawy; Walid K Abdelbasset; Dalia M Kamel; Saud M Alrawaili
Journal:  Lasers Med Sci       Date:  2018-05-30       Impact factor: 3.161

2.  Low-level laser therapy in 3D cell culture model using gingival fibroblasts.

Authors:  Fernanda G Basso; Diana G Soares; Carlos Alberto de Souza Costa; Josimeri Hebling
Journal:  Lasers Med Sci       Date:  2016-04-28       Impact factor: 3.161

Review 3.  Should open excisions and sutured incisions be treated differently? A review and meta-analysis of animal wound models following low-level laser therapy.

Authors:  Peter Gál; Martin Bjørn Stausholm; Ivan Kováč; Erik Dosedla; Ján Luczy; František Sabol; Jan Magnus Bjordal
Journal:  Lasers Med Sci       Date:  2018-03-30       Impact factor: 3.161

4.  A randomized, open-label, controlled trial to evaluate the antimicrobial and surgical effect of CO2 laser treatment in diabetic infected foot ulcers: DULCIS (diabetic ulcer, CO2 laser, and infections) study.

Authors:  M Monami; A Scatena; S Zannoni; S Aleffi; C Mirabella; L Giannoni; E Mannucci
Journal:  J Endocrinol Invest       Date:  2017-04-04       Impact factor: 4.256

5.  The influence of low- intensity laser irradiation versus hyperbaric oxygen therapy on transcutaneous oxygen tension in chronic diabetic foot ulcers: a controlled randomized trial.

Authors:  Amir N Wadee; Mohamed Hisham Fouad Aref; Ayman A Nassar; Ibrahim H Aboughaleb; Siham M Fahmy
Journal:  J Diabetes Metab Disord       Date:  2021-09-03

6.  Successful Treatment of Digital Ischemia Following a Carbon Dioxide Laser and Tourniquet for a Digital Procedure With Adjuvant Low-Level Laser Therapy.

Authors:  Suparuj Lueangarun; Therdpong Tempark
Journal:  J Lasers Med Sci       Date:  2019-07-06

Review 7.  Visible light. Part I: Properties and cutaneous effects of visible light.

Authors:  Evan Austin; Amaris N Geisler; Julie Nguyen; Indermeet Kohli; Iltefat Hamzavi; Henry W Lim; Jared Jagdeo
Journal:  J Am Acad Dermatol       Date:  2021-02-25       Impact factor: 11.527

Review 8.  Effectiveness of Laser Therapy in the Management of Recurrent Aphthous Stomatitis: A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Min Han; Hui Fang; Quan-Li Li; Ying Cao; Rong Xia; Zhi-Hong Zhang
Journal:  Scientifica (Cairo)       Date:  2016-12-18

9.  Light-emitting diodes in dermatology: A systematic review of randomized controlled trials.

Authors:  Jared Jagdeo; Evan Austin; Andrew Mamalis; Christopher Wong; Derek Ho; Daniel M Siegel
Journal:  Lasers Surg Med       Date:  2018-01-22       Impact factor: 4.025

10.  Electric Factors in Wound Healing.

Authors:  Paulo Luiz Farber; Felipe Contoli Isoldi; Lydia Masako Ferreira
Journal:  Adv Wound Care (New Rochelle)       Date:  2020-10-06       Impact factor: 4.947

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.