Skin reactions after photodynamic therapy are unaffected by 839 nm photobiomodulation therapy: A randomized, double‐blind, placebo‐controlled, clinical trial

Abstract

Under the current study conditions, PDT-induced skin reactions were unaffected by PBM. Lasers Surg. Med. 49:810-818, 2017. © 2017 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Prevention of acute radiodermatitis by photobiomodulation: A randomized, placebo‐controlled trial in breast cancer patients (TRANSDERMIS trial)

“…They exposed the left or right side of the buttock of 20 healthy volunteers to PBMT (830/590, 109 mW/cm 2 , 65 J/cm 2 per treatment) or placebo (595 nm, 0.19 mW/cm 2 , 0.13 J/cm 2 per treatment) during five daily sessions after ablative fractional laser‐assisted photodynamic therapy (PDT), to investigate the effectiveness of PBM in the reduction of inflammatory skin reactions. Results of this study did not show any benefit of PBMT in the reduction of PDT‐induced skin reactions .…”

“…during five daily sessions after ablative fractional laserassisted photodynamic therapy (PDT), to investigate the effectiveness of PBM in the reduction of inflammatory skin reactions. Results of this study did not show any benefit of PBMT in the reduction of PDT-induced skin reactions [34]. All together, these results demonstrate that PBMT is only an effective treatment option for wound healing, when Fig.…”

Differential response of human dermal fibroblast subpopulations to visible and near‐infrared light: Potential of photobiomodulation for addressing cutaneous conditions

“…Light treatment was performed outside the incubator and the culture medium was replenished after each irradiation to avoid the indirect effect of light on cells that may be mediated by components contained in the cell culture medium [29]. Irradiance levels were fixed to 30,30,30,7,60, and 80 mW/cm 2 at 450, 500, 530, 590, 655, and 850 nm, respectively, defined by the maximal emitting power of the LEDs.…”

“…In dermatology, applications of PBM span a very wide range of conditions including wound healing, hair regrowth, treatment of psoriasis and others [1][2][3][4][5][6][7]. While the commercialization of devices based on PBM has been progressing at a very fast pace over the past years, the field still lacks significant consensus about fundamental mechanisms of PBM, including the molecular targets of light and the optimal selection of optical treatment parameters [2,3].…”

Light‐emitting diodes in dermatology: A systematic review of randomized controlled trials

“…In a split‐face RCT of 28 female patients treated with ER:YAG or CO 2 laser for photodamaged skin, healing time was 50% faster on the combination LED‐RL (633‐nm, 96 J/cm 2 , 80 mW/cm 2 , 50% duty cycle, 20 minutes) and LED‐nIR (830‐nm, 60 J/cm 2 , 55 mW/cm 2 , 50% duty cycle, 20 minutes) treated side compared to no treatment after 15 treatments over 3 weeks . One double‐blind, split‐body RCT compared combined LED‐nIR (830‐nm, 65 J/cm 2 , 109 mW/cm 2 , unclear duty cycle, 11 minutes) and LED‐YL (595‐nm, 0.13 J/cm 2 , 0.19 mW/cm 2 , 11 minutes) to LED‐YL alone for reduced erythema and pigmentation following CO 2 assisted red light PDT . There was no significant difference between LED‐nIR and LED‐YL compared the LED‐YL in physician assessment, erythema, or hyperpigmentation.…”