Evaluation of Efficacy of Low-Level Laser Therapy
Mansouri V., Arjmand B., Rezaei Tavirani M., Razzaghi M., Rostami-Nejad M., Hamdieh M.
Narrative Review, published in J Lasers Med Sci (2020) — summary generated from the PubMed abstract.
Evidence from laboratory and animal studies provides groundwork for understanding mechanisms and potential before human studies continue.
- 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
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
- Narrative Review
- Journal
- J Lasers Med Sci (2020)
- Reported sample size
- —
- Source database
- Europe PMC
- PMID
- 33425286
- PMCID
- PMC7736953
- DOI
- 10.34172/jlms.2020.60
- Citations
- 32
Abstract (original English)
Introduction: Given the inconsistencies in the literature regarding laser performance in non-surgical treatments, this study investigated the available literature to determine the advantages and disadvantages of low-power lasers in treating non-surgical complications and diseases. Methods: Authentic information from articles was extracted and evaluated to assess low-power laser performance for non-surgical treatments. A systematic search of studies on low-level laser therapy (LLLT) for non-surgical treatments was conducted mainly in PubMed and google scholar articles. Results: Four categories of diseases, including brain-related diseases, skin-related diseases, cancers, and bone-related disorders, which were treated by LLLT were identified and introduced. The various types of LLLT regarding the studied diseases were discussed. Conclusion: Positive aspects of LLLT versus a few disadvantages of its application imply more investigation to find better and efficient new methods.
What this study does not prove
- • This study does not prove SVF is an approved treatment or a replacement for standard care.
- • This is a narrative review: it collects no new patient data and does not systematically appraise evidence quality.
Evidence level
Evidence from laboratory and animal studies provides groundwork for understanding mechanisms and potential before human studies continue.
How we grade evidenceBrowse all related research
Filter the research library by this study's title keywords, author, or publication year.