| Literature DB >> 35601476 |
Juliano Abreu Pacheco1, Kelly Fernanda Molena2, Camila Raíssa Oliveira Gontijo Martins2, Silmara Aparecida Milori Corona3, Maria Cristina Borsatto4.
Abstract
Background: In 2019, a viral and respiratory pathology called COVID-19 emerged in Wuhan, China, and spread to other continents. Its main symptoms include fever, cough, dyspnea, myalgia, anorexia and respiratory distress in the most severe cases, which can lead to death. Furthermore, manifestations in the oral cavity such as ageusia and dysgeusia, as well as lesions in other regions of the oral cavity, can be observed. Main body: This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to critically assess the clinical evidence on the use of photobiomodulation (PBMT) and antimicrobial photodynamic therapy (aPDT) for the treatment of oral lesions in patients infected with Sars-Cov-2. The literature extracted from electronic databases such as PubMed, Medline, CINAHL, and Google Scholar was screened for eligibility, and relevant articles were included. The review is limited to manuscripts published in English, Spanish and Portuguese language between December 2019 and October 2021. A total of 5 articles with 11 cases retracting PBMT and aPDT as therapeutic strategies for the regression of oral lesions and painful symptoms. The results show favoring the associated use of PBMT with aPDT (P = 0.004), and the isolated use of PBMT with the result of significant "P = 0.005" and good confidence interval (7.18, 39.20) in ulcerative lesions, herpetic, aphthous, erythematous, petechiae and necrotic areas. Conclusions: PBMT and aPDT could be effective in the treatment of oral lesions of patients infected with Sars-Cov-2 in a short period of time; however, more long-term randomized clinical trials studies are needed to define the therapeutic strategy.Entities:
Keywords: COVID-19; Coronavirus; LLLT; Low level laser therapy; Oral manifestation; Photodynamic therapy; Sars-CoV-2
Year: 2022 PMID: 35601476 PMCID: PMC9108688 DOI: 10.1186/s42269-022-00830-z
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Bull Natl Res Cent ISSN: 1110-0591
PICO Strategy with inclusion criteria using on research
| PICO strategy | |
|---|---|
| Population | Patients infected by the Sars-CoV-2 infection who had oral lesions and were treated with PBMT or aPDT laser therapy |
| Intervention | Patients were exposed to photobiomodulation therapy (PBMT) and/or antimicrobial photodynamic therapy (aPDT) |
| Comparison | Comparison between patients who did not use PBMT and/or aPDT |
| Outcome | Observe whether or not there was improvement in the lesions after using PBMT and aPDT |
Fig. 1Literature search flow diagram and selection criteria adapted from PRISMA (Preferred report items for systematic reviews and meta-analysis)
Characteristics of the included studies, according to Author and year of publication; Place and type of injury, Technique and Parameters in the use of Laser and outcome
| Author and Year | Local and type of lesion | Technique applied and Laser parameter | Outcome |
|---|---|---|---|
| Brandão et. al. ( | Upper lip, lower lip and anterior dorsum of tongue. Necrotic and aphthous ulcers | PBMT. 40 mW, beam area 0.04 cm2, 1 W/cm 2 irradiance, energy 0.4 J and 10 J/cm2 creep and 660 nm | Symptom relief within 2 days and complete resolution of lesions within 11 days |
| Brandão et. al. ( | Upper lip, lower lip and anterior dorsum of tongue. Necrotic areas and aphthous ulcers | PBMT. 40 mW, beam area 0.04 cm2, 1 W/cm2 irradiance, energy 0.4 J and 10 J/cm2 creep and 660 nm | Improvement of intraoral lesions in 10 days and lip ulcerations there was no improvement until the publication of the case, as well as the clinical case of the patient |
| Brandão et. al. ( | Lateral edge of tongue and palate. Petechiae and necrotic areas | PBMT. 40 mW, beam area 0.04 cm2, 1 W/cm 2 irradiance, energy 0.4 J and 10 J/cm2 creep and 660 nm | Total pain control in 5 days |
| Brandão et. al. ( | Upper and lower lip mucosa. Necrotic and hemorrhagic ulcers | PBMT. 40 mW, beam area 0.04 cm2, 1 W/cm 2 irradiance, energy 0.4 J and 10 J/cm2 creep and 660 nm | Pain regression and clinical improvement in 7 days |
| Teixeira et. al. ( | Upper and lower lip injury. Hemorrhagic and necrotic ulcers | PBMT and aPDT. 100 mW, 33 J/cm2, 0.5 J and 5 s per point. A total of 6 points were distributed for the injuries. Soon after, an aPDT technique was performed, with 0.01% methylene blue applied to all lesions, and after 3 min (pre-irradiation time), the same laser parameters were used, but providing 40 s (4 J) per lesion, 660 nm | Total improvement of the lesion in 3 days and healing within the first 24 h |
| Teixeira et. al. ( | Upper and lower lip injury. Erythematous lesions | PBMT and aPDT. 100 mW, 33 J/cm2, 0.5 J and 5 s per point. A total of 6 points were distributed for the injuries. Soon after, an aPDT technique was performed, with 0.01% methylene blue applied to all lesions, and after 3 min (pre-irradiation time), the same laser parameters were used, but providing 40 s (4 J) per lesion, 660 nm | Total improvement of the lesion after 24 h |
| Teixeira et. al. ( | Upper and lower lip injury. Painful scaly lip lesions | PBMT and aPDT. 100 mW, 33 J/cm2, 0.5 J and 5 s per point. A total of 6 points were distributed for the injuries. Soon after, an aPDT technique was performed, with 0.01% methylene blue applied to all lesions, and after 3 min (pre-irradiation time), the same laser parameters were used, but providing 40 s (4 J) per lesion, 660 nm | Total improvement of lesions in 3 days |
| Teixeira et. al. ( | Upper and lower lip injury. Painful scaly lip lesions | PBMT and aPDT. 100 mW, 33 J/cm2, 0.5 J and 5 s per point. A total of 6 points were distributed for the injuries. Soon after, an aPDT technique was performed, with 0.01% methylene blue applied to all lesions, and after 3 min (pre-irradiation time), the same laser parameters were used, but providing 40 s (4 J) per lesion, 660 nm | Complete resolution of lesions within 4 days |
| Ramires et. al. ( | Upper and lower lip injury. Extensive necrotic ulcers | PBMT and aPDT. aPDT was performed for 2 days. For this, 0.01% methylene blue was applied to all lesions after 5 min (pre-irradiation time), 100 mW, 32.14 J/cm2, 9 J and 9 s per point and PBMT 100 mW, 17.8 J/cm2, 1 J and 10 s of irradiation per spot at 660 and 808 nm, using a laser device programming tool that changes the wavelength periodically (every 5 s) | Wound healing in 4 days |
| Baeder et. al. ( | Region between attached gingiva and palate. Ulcers, erythema and vesicles | PBMT. 3 J every 2 days for 1 week, 660 nm | Burning ceased in 7 days and after 14 days, the lesions disappeared completely |
| Garcez et. al. ( | Upper and lower lips and inner labial mucosa of the gingiva. Edema with mucosal desquamation, ulceration and blood crusts on the inner surface of the labial mucosa, gingival petechiae and erythematous/pseudomembranous lesions on the dorsum of the tongue, suggestive of candidiasis | PBMT and aPDT. aPDT was performed using a low power laser and methylene blue as a photosensitizer. 300 μM aqueous methylene blue solution was applied to the lips, palate and tongue with a cotton swab for 1 min, followed by irradiation of a laser light source operating at 100 mW and 660 nm with the following protocol: 90 s, resulting in an energy of 9 J per irradiation point and an energy density of 300 J/cm2, total of 6 points—including lips (4 points), palate (2 points) and tongue (4 points), the total irradiation time was 15 min. After the aPDT sessions, oral lesions were irradiated with 2 J of energy per point to cover the oral mucosa surface bilaterally (5 points on each side) using the same equipment, resulting in 20 s of irradiation per point and energy density per stitch of 66 J/cm2 | Oral lesions improved after 3 days of aPDT after which treatment was followed with PBM for 4 days. The patient did not complain of discomfort in the tongue and lips after starting the photodynamic treatment with an antimicrobial |
Risk of bias assessed by the Joanna Briggs Institute Critical appraisal checklist for case series
| Authors | Q.1 | Q.2 | Q.3 | Q.4 | Q.5 | Q.6 | Q.7 | Q.8 | Q.9 | Q.10 | %yes/risk |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Baeder et al. ( | U | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | – | N/A | 70%/30% |
| Brandão et al. ( | U | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | – | N/A | 70%/30% |
| Ramires et al. ( | √ | √ | √ | N/A | N/A | √ | √ | √ | – | N/A | 60%/40% |
| Teixeira et al. ( | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | – | N/A | 80%/20% |
| Garcez et al. ( | √ | √ | √ | N/A | √ | √ | √ | √ | – | N/A | 70%/30% |
√-yes; –-No; U-Unclear; N/A-not applicable
Fig. 2Forest plot demonstrating meta-analysis for oral manifestations for COVID-19 patients facing the treatment of PBMT associated with aPDT
Fig. 3Forest plot demonstrating meta-analysis for oral manifestations for COVID-19 patients facing PBMT treatment