Review of light parameters and photobiomodulation efficacy: dive into complexity
Zein R, Selting W, Hamblin MR
Journal of biomedical optics · 287 citations
Review labels
Neutral facts our review recorded about how this study was done. They describe method, never whether we like the result.
How it was studied
- Design
- Meta-analysis (indexed by PubMed)
- Studied in
- Cells or lab samples
- Main outcome
- Mechanisms only
Who paid for it
- Funding
- Independent funding
- Government
- National Institutes of Health
- Government
- National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases
- Government
- NIAID NIH HHS
- Authors
- At least one author declares a financial tie to industry
- Grants
- National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (R01 AI050875); National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (R21 AI121700); National Institutes of Health (R01AI050875); National Institutes of Health (R21AI121700)
Based on 3 listed funder(s) and full-text disclosure statement.
Publication
- Published
- 2018-12-11 · J Biomed Opt · vol. 23 · issue 12 · p. 1
- Publisher
- SPIE
- Cited
- 460 citations · more than 99% of similar papers · 13.0× the field average
- Impact
- Top 10% most cited in its field
- References
- 114 works
- Access
- Open access (journal)
- Research areas
- Laser Applications in Dentistry and Medicine · Dental Anxiety and Anesthesia Techniques
- Keywords
- Mitochondrion, In vivo, Power density, Energy density, Dosing, Biomedical engineering, Biophysics, Medicine, Materials science, Chemistry, Biology, Internal medicine, Power (physics), Physics, Biochemistry
- MeSH
- cells, cultured, mitochondria, animals, humans, mice, radiation dosage, infrared rays, low-level light therapy
3 authors
From IT, US
- Randa ZeinUniversity of Genoa
- Wayne J. SeltingUniversity of Genoa
- Michael R. HamblinHarvard University; Harvard University Press; Massachusetts General Hospital
Abstract
Photobiomodulation (PBM) therapy, previously known as low-level laser therapy, was discovered more than 50 years ago, yet there is still no agreement on the parameters and protocols for its clinical application. Some groups have recommended the use of a power density less than 100 mW/cm2 and an energy density of 4 to 10 J/cm2 at the level of the target tissue. Others recommend as much as 50 J/cm2 at the tissue surface. The wide range of parameters that can be applied (wavelength, energy, fluence, power, irradiance, pulse mode, treatment duration, and repetition) in some cases has led to contradictory results. In our review, we attempt to evaluate the range of effective and ineffective parameters in PBM. Studies in vitro with cultured cells or in vivo with different tissues were divided into those with higher numbers of mitochondria (muscle, brain, heart, nerve) or lower numbers of mitochondria (skin, tendon, cartilage). Graphs were plotted of energy density against power density. Although the results showed a high degree of variability, cells/tissues with high numbers of mitochondria tended to respond to lower doses of light than those with lower number of mitochondria. Ineffective studies in cells with high mitochondrial activity appeared to be more often due to over-dosing than to under-dosing.
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.