Low level laser therapy (Photobiomodulation therapy) for breast cancer-related lymphedema: a systematic review
Baxter GD, Liu L, Petrich S, Gisselman AS, Chapple C, Anders JJ, Tumilty S
BMC cancer · 74 citations
How it was studied
- Design
- Systematic review (indexed by PubMed)
- Studied in
- People
- Main outcome
- Health markers and function
Who paid for it
- Funding
- Independent funding
- Nonprofit
- Breast Cancer Foundation New Zealand
- Nonprofit
- New Zealand Breast Cancer Foundation
Based on 2 listed funder(s) and full-text disclosure statement.
Publication
- Published
- 2017-12-01 · BMC Cancer · vol. 17 · issue 1 · p. 833
- Publisher
- BioMed Central
- Cited
- 150 citations · more than 75% of similar papers · 0.9× the field average
- References
- 60 works
- Access
- Open access (journal) · CC-BY
- Research areas
- Lymphatic System and Diseases · Diagnosis and Treatment of Venous Diseases · Body Contouring and Surgery
- Keywords
- Medicine, Lymphedema, Surgical oncology, Breast cancer, Low level laser therapy, Cancer therapy, Laser therapy, Oncology, Cancer, Radiation therapy, Internal medicine, Laser
- MeSH
- humans, female, randomized controlled trials as topic, low-level light therapy, breast cancer lymphedema
7 authors
From NZ, US
- David G. Baxter · correspondingUniversity of Otago
- Lizhou LiuUniversity of Otago
- Simone PetrichSouthern District Health Board
- Angela Spontelli GisselmanUniversity of Otago
- Cathy ChappleUniversity of Otago
- Juanita J. AndersUniformed Services University of the Health Sciences
Abstract
Background
Breast cancer related lymphedema (BCRL) is a prevalent complication secondary to cancer treatments which significantly impacts the physical and psychological health of breast cancer survivors. Previous research shows increasing use of low level laser therapy (LLLT), now commonly referred to as photobiomodulation (PBM) therapy, for BCRL. This systematic review evaluated the effectiveness of LLLT (PBM) in the management of BCRL.
Methods
Clinical trials were searched in PubMed, AMED, Web of Science, and China National Knowledge Infrastructure up to November 2016. Two reviewers independently assessed the methodological quality and adequacy of LLLT (PBM) in these clinical trials. Primary outcome measures were limb circumference/volume, and secondary outcomes included pain intensity and range of motion. Because data were clinically heterogeneous, best evidence synthesis was performed.
Results
Eleven clinical trials were identified, of which seven randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were chosen for analysis. Overall, the methodological quality of included RCTs was high, whereas the reporting of treatment parameters was poor. Results indicated that there is strong evidence (three high quality trials) showing LLLT (PBM) was more effective than sham treatment for limb circumference/volume reduction at a short-term follow-up. There is moderate evidence (one high quality trial) indicating that LLLT (PBM) was more effective than sham laser for short-term pain relief, and limited evidence (one low quality trial) that LLLT (PBM) was more effective than no treatment for decreasing limb swelling at short-term follow-up.
Conclusions
Based upon the current systematic review, LLLT (PBM) may be considered an effective treatment approach for women with BCRL. Due to the limited numbers of published trials available, there is a clear need for well-designed high-quality trials in this area. The optimal treatment parameters for clinical application have yet to be elucidated.
Abstract via Europe PMC. Copyright remains with the authors or publisher (CC BY).
Community trust
Loading…
How much do you trust this study's findings?
Comments
Sign in to rate, comment on or flag this study.Sign inSomething wrong here?
Flag this study if its information, labels or funding look wrong. An editor reviews every flag.
Sign in to rate, comment on or flag this study.Sign inEducational information about published research. Not medical advice, and not a recommendation to start or stop anything.