Level C· Early human research exploring benefitsProspective StudyEurope PMCOpen access

The effect of combined red, blue, and near-infrared light-emitting diode (LED) photobiomodulation therapy on speed of wound healing after superficial ablative fractional resurfacing

Soliman J., Elsanadi R., Messele F., Kelly KM.

Prospective Study with a reported sample of 25 on Chronic Wound, published in Lasers Med Sci (2024) — summary generated from the PubMed abstract.

Open my reading list
Level C· Early human research exploring benefitsEvidence level of this study

Early human evidence such as case series or small samples is exploring possible benefits.

  • Level A · Stronger Clinical Evidence
  • Level B · Emerging clinical evidence with positive signals
  • Level C · Early human research exploring benefits
  • Level D · Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studies
  • Emerging · Emerging topic under active research
Read the A–D evidence level guide

This page is generated from the PubMed record. The Thai description is an automated summary of bibliographic fields and the abstract, not a full translation, and is not medical advice.

Study type
Prospective Study
Journal
Lasers Med Sci (2024)
Reported sample size
25
Source database
Europe PMC
PMID
38532146
PMCID
PMC10965566
DOI
10.1007/s10103-024-04042-x
Citations
5

Abstract (original English)

Objective of the study is to assess the effects of wound healing with a commercially available light emitting diode (LED) photo biomodulation (PBM) device that emits three wavelengths (465, 640 and 880nm) after ablative fractional laser (AFL) treatment to healthy skin on the bilateral inner biceps. We conducted a prospective intraindividual randomized controlled study with 25 volunteers. AFL treatment was performed on healthy skin of the bilateral inner biceps. Subjects applied the LED light device for 30 min to the assigned bicep 3 times a week over 4 weeks, beginning on day 0. Subjects were followed up on days 2, 4, 6, 9, 13, 20 and 27 for treatment with the PBM device, clinical digital photography of the test and control sites, and in-person subject assessment, with follow ups on days 34 and 55 for clinical photography and assessment. Three blinded evaluators were asked to determine which bicep healed faster between day 0 to day 13. Pain, discomfort, and itch were also assessed. The three blinded evaluators chose the treatment arm as the faster healed arm in greater than 50% of the images, although the results were not statistically significant. There was no statistically significant difference between test and control arms in terms of pain, discomfort and itch. In conclusion, PBM therapy has the potential to improve wound healing. In this study, a three wavelength PBM devic

What this study does not prove

  • • This study does not prove SVF is an approved treatment or a replacement for standard care.

Evidence level

Early human evidence such as case series or small samples is exploring possible benefits.

How we grade evidence
SkinHumansPainProspective StudiesWound HealingLow-Level Light Therapy

Browse all related research

Filter the research library by this study's title keywords, author, or publication year.

Related research