4.4 Review

Systematic Review of Photobiomodulation Therapy (PBMT) on the Experimental Calcaneal Tendon Injury in Rats

期刊

PHOTOCHEMISTRY AND PHOTOBIOLOGY
卷 96, 期 5, 页码 981-997

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/php.13262

关键词

-

资金

  1. Post-Graduation Program in Biomedical Engineering of the Universidade Brasil

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This systematic review analyzed the light parameters and the effects of photobiomodulation therapy (PBMT) through low-level laser therapy (LLLT) and/or LED (light-emitting diode) on tendon repair of rats submitted to calcaneal injury. This study was conducted in accordance with the guidelines of the Preferred Reporting Items for Meta-Analysis, and PubMed and MEDLINE databases were accessed to search eligible studies published in English. The search terms were as follows: Achilles tendon or Calcaneal tendon or tendon injuries or soft tissue injuries and tendinopathy or tendinitis and low-level light therapy or low-level laser therapy or low intensity power therapy or light-emitting diode or photobiomodulation. The SYRCLE (SYstematic Review Center for Laboratory animal Experimentation) risks of bias was used to assess the risk of bias for selected studies. A total of 225 studies were found based on the descriptors used, and only 33 studies were eligible. Light parameters identified per point of irradiation were approximately 60 mW (continuous mode at infrared spectra), 2 W cm(-2), 2 J and 45 J cm(-2). Light parameters at red spectra, continuous versus pulsed mode, and PBMT combined or compared with other therapies such as ultrasound, and studies using unhealthy rats (ovariectomized and/or diabetic models) were also identified and grouped according to these similarities. The main effects found were decreased inflammatory markers and signs of inflammatory process. PBMT (laser/LED) has positive effects in reducing the inflammatory and time for tissue repair in animal models of tendon injury and/or tendinitis using parameters identified.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据