Lilian de Araujo Pradal, Edicleia de Freitas, Marcia Rosangela Buzanello Azevedo, Rosemeire Costa, Gladson Ricardo Flor Bertolini
{"title":"Photobiomodulation in Burn Wounds: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Clinical and Preclinical Studies.","authors":"Lilian de Araujo Pradal, Edicleia de Freitas, Marcia Rosangela Buzanello Azevedo, Rosemeire Costa, Gladson Ricardo Flor Bertolini","doi":"10.1089/photob.2023.0181","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b><i>Objective:</i></b> This systematic review and meta-analysis main goal was to evaluate the efficacy of photobiomodulation as burn wounds treatment. <b><i>Methods:</i></b> Systematic review of literature available in databases such as PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences Literature (LILACS), and The Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) and gray literature in Google Scholar, Livivi, and Open Gray. SYRCLE's RoB tool was applied to determine methodological quality and risk of bias, and meta-analysis was performed using the software Review Manager. <b><i>Results:</i></b> Fifty-one studies, gathering more than three thousand animals were included in this systematic review, and four studies were selected to the meta-analysis due to their suitability. The results indicated that photobiomodulation was not effective to improve, statistical significantly, wound retraction (SMD = -0.22; 95% CI = -4.19, 3.75; <i>p</i> = 0.91; <i>I</i><sup>2</sup> = 92%) or collagen deposition (SMD = -0.02; 95% CI = -2.17, 2.13; <i>p</i> = 0.99; <i>I</i><sup>2</sup> = 78%). <b><i>Conclusion:</i></b> This meta-analysis suggests that photobiomodulation, applied in burn wounds, accordingly to the protocols presented by the selected studies, was not effective over analyzed outcomes. However, this conclusion could be further discussed and verified in more homogeneous animal models and human clinical trials.</p>","PeriodicalId":94169,"journal":{"name":"Photobiomodulation, photomedicine, and laser surgery","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Photobiomodulation, photomedicine, and laser surgery","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1089/photob.2023.0181","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Objective: This systematic review and meta-analysis main goal was to evaluate the efficacy of photobiomodulation as burn wounds treatment. Methods: Systematic review of literature available in databases such as PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences Literature (LILACS), and The Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) and gray literature in Google Scholar, Livivi, and Open Gray. SYRCLE's RoB tool was applied to determine methodological quality and risk of bias, and meta-analysis was performed using the software Review Manager. Results: Fifty-one studies, gathering more than three thousand animals were included in this systematic review, and four studies were selected to the meta-analysis due to their suitability. The results indicated that photobiomodulation was not effective to improve, statistical significantly, wound retraction (SMD = -0.22; 95% CI = -4.19, 3.75; p = 0.91; I2 = 92%) or collagen deposition (SMD = -0.02; 95% CI = -2.17, 2.13; p = 0.99; I2 = 78%). Conclusion: This meta-analysis suggests that photobiomodulation, applied in burn wounds, accordingly to the protocols presented by the selected studies, was not effective over analyzed outcomes. However, this conclusion could be further discussed and verified in more homogeneous animal models and human clinical trials.
目的:本系统综述和荟萃分析的主要目的是评估光生物调节作为烧伤创面治疗方法的疗效。方法对PubMed、Web of Science、Embase、Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences Literature (LILACS)、The Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL)等数据库中的文献以及Google Scholar、Livivi和Open Gray中的灰色文献进行系统综述。采用 SYRCLE 的 RoB 工具确定方法质量和偏倚风险,并使用 Review Manager 软件进行荟萃分析。结果本系统综述共纳入了 51 项研究,收集了三千多只动物,其中 4 项研究因其适用性而被选入荟萃分析。结果表明,光生物调节对改善伤口回缩(SMD = -0.22;95% CI = -4.19,3.75;P = 0.91;I2 = 92%)或胶原沉积(SMD = -0.02;95% CI = -2.17,2.13;P = 0.99;I2 = 78%)无显著统计学意义。结论这项荟萃分析表明,根据所选研究提出的方案对烧伤创面进行光生物调节,对分析结果无效。不过,这一结论还需要在更同质的动物模型和人体临床试验中进一步讨论和验证。