Acne is a dermatosis that affects almost 90% of the adolescent population worldwide and its treatment is performed with retinoids, antimicrobials, acids, and topical or systemic antibiotics. Side effects such as skin irritation in addition to microbial resistance to antibiotics are the main side effects found. Phototherapy with blue light is being used as an alternative treatment. Our objective was to analyze the use of blue light to treat inflammatory acne. We conducted a systematic literature review, following the recommendation PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and MetaAnalyses), including in the sample randomized clinical trial studies that compared blue light with another intervention as control. The research was carried out in the PUBMED and WEB of SCIENCE databases and the methodological quality of the studies evaluated were made by the Cochrane Collaboration Bias Risk Scale. After the exclusion of duplicates, the titles and abstracts of 81 articles were evaluated, and 50 articles were selected for full reading, including in the review at the end 8 articles. Studies have shown significant improvements in the overall picture of acne. It is concluded that despite the great potential in its use in the treatment of acne, there is a need for more detailed trials on the effect of blue light on the treatment of inflammatory acne.

No abstract

Objective: To compare the efficacy of photobiomodulation and occlusal splint in patients with TMD-associated myofascial pain. Material and methods: 23 patients were randomized into 2 groups: laser group (LG) (n = 12) and occlusal splint group (OSG) (n=11). For the LG, laser was applied to 3 points on each side of the face. Twelve applications were made, 2 sessions per week. In the OSG, patients were instructed to use the device during sleep, 8 hours per night, for a period of 6 weeks, and 12 adjustment and follow-up sessions were performed. Patients in both groups were reevaluated 30 days after the end of the treatments. Results: There was a decrease in pain intensity, according to a visual analogue scale, in both groups before and after 1 month (LG, p = 0.008 and OSG p = 0.002), but with no difference between groups. For the quality of life, both treatments had a positive impact, with this impact being higher in the LG compared to the OSG (p <0.05). Regarding the cost-effectiveness analysis, laser was more cost-effective than the occlusal splint in the clinical trial. The incremental cost of the laser was $3,483.45 compared to the splint, but it had a cost ratio of $4,569.02 for controlled pain intensity while the splint showed $6,691.91 ratio for controlled pain intensity. Conclusion: The photobiomodulation was more cost-effective in controlling painful symptoms in patients with TMD and myofascial pain.

Background: This systematic review aimed to assess the effectiveness and safety of aPDT for the treatment of halitosis. Methods: Search strategies were conducted in October 2021 without language or data restrictions, on the following databases: MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, LILACS and BBO, as well as a manual search. Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) with parallel design were considered for inclusion, assessing individuals (adolescents and adults) with a clinical diagnosis of halitosis treated with photodynamic therapy (aPDT). Primary outcomes assessed were halitosis measurements, adverse events and quality of life. The risk of bias for each included study was evaluated with the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool and the certainty of the body of the evidence was assessed with the GRADe approach. Results: Six RCTs (total of 225 participants) were included and due to clinical diversities it was not possible to group the outcome data in meta-analyses. Based on very low-certainty evidence (GRADE) the results showed that, when compared to tongue scraper, aPDT seems to promote a little to no difference in reducing halitosis and in the microbiological analysis. No adverse events were reported. Considering aPDT combined with tongue scraper, better outcome results were observed when compared to tongue scraper alone. Conclusions: Based on very low-certainty evidence, the findings of this review are uncertain about the effects of aPDT for halitosis control. Further RCTs with higher number of participants and long term assessments need to be conducted to support the use of this intervention. The protocol was registered in the PROSPERO database (number: CRD42020215319) on 19 November 2020—retrospectively registered.

No abstract

Introduction:Poor positioning of the child in relation to the breast and improper suckling are the main causes of nipple fissure. Treatment options for nipple fissures include drug therapy with antifungal and antibiotics, topical applications of lanolin, glycerin gel, creams and lotions, the milk itself, hot compresses, and silicone nipple shields. Studies involving light-emitting diode (LED) therapy have demonstrated anti-inflammatory properties, the enhancement of the wound repair process, and the control of pain. As it does not cause discomfort, is relatively inexpensive and may impede the discontinuation of breastfeeding, phototherapy could be a viable option for the treatment of nipple fissures.Aim:The principal objective of the proposed study is to evaluate the effectiveness of LED therapy for the treatment of nipple fissures in postpartum mothers.Materials and methods:One hundred patients treated with a medical diagnosis of bilateral nipple trauma classified as nipple fissures or cracks will participate in the study, randomized into 2 groups: The control group will receive orientation regarding breast care and adequate breastfeeding techniques. The experimental group will receive the same orientation and phototherapy sessions using a device developed especially for the treatment of nipple trauma. Both groups will be followed up for 6 consecutive weeks.