Level C· Early human research exploring benefitsProspective StudyPubMedOpen access

The impact of wavelengths of LED light-therapy on endothelial cells.

Rohringer S., Holnthoner W., Chaudary S., Slezak P., Priglinger E., Strassl M.

Prospective Study on Chronic Wound, published in Sci Rep (2017) — 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
Sci Rep (2017)
Country
England
Reported sample size
—
Source database
PubMed
PMID
28878330
PMCID
PMC5587748
DOI
10.1038/s41598-017-11061-y
Citations
64

Abstract (original English)

Low level light therapy receives increasing interest in the fields of tissue regeneration and wound healing. Several in vivo studies demonstrated the positive effects of LLLT on angiogenesis. This study aimed to investigate the underlying properties in vitro by comparing the effects of light therapy by light emitting diodes of different wavelengths on endothelial cells in vitro. Human umbilical vein endothelial cells were treated with either 475 nm, 516 nm or 635 nm light. Control cells were not illuminated. 2D proliferation was quantified by manual counting. HUVEC migration was analyzed by performing a 2D wound scratch assay and a 3D bead assay. The influence of LLLT on early vasculogenic events was determined in a 3D fibrin co-culture model with adipose-derived stem cells. Stimulation with both red and green pulsed LED light significantly increased HUVEC proliferation and 3D migration. Moreover, HUVEC showed increased 2D migration potential with green light stimulation. The treatment with blue light was ineffective. Several parameters showed that green light was even more potent to stimulate proliferation and migration of endothelial cells than clinically well-established red light therapy. Further studies have to focus on intracellular mechanisms induced by different wavelengths in order to optimize this promising therapy in tissue regeneration.

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
BiomarkersCell MovementCell ProliferationCells, CulturedEndothelial CellsGene ExpressionGenes, ReporterHuman Umbilical Vein Endothelial CellsHumansLight

Browse all related research

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

Related research