scholarly journals Effects of low-level laser therapy versus soft occlusive splints on mouth opening and surface electromyography in females with temporomandibular dysfunction: A randomized-controlled study

PLoS ONE ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (10) ◽  
pp. e0258063
Author(s):  
Tamer Shousha ◽  
Mohamed Alayat ◽  
Ibrahim Moustafa
Keyword(s):  
Laser Therapy ◽  
Surface Electromyography ◽  
Low Level Laser Therapy ◽  
Controlled Study ◽  
Low Level ◽  
Cell Functions ◽  
Splint Therapy ◽  
Low Level Laser ◽  
Level Laser ◽  
Significant Difference

Background Low level lasers have been used as an alternative pain relief therapy for muscle and joint pain, since it induces analgesic, anti-inflammatory, and biomodulation effects of the physiological cell functions. The effectiveness of low-level laser therapy in temporomandibular joint dysfunction (TMD) treatment, however, is not well established. Although Surface electromyography (sEMG) has been suggested as a complementary means in TMD diagnosis, the effect of conservative treatments on muscle activity has not yet been thoroughly correlated with (sEMG) findings. Purpose To assess the efficacy of low-level laser therapy (LLLT) as compared to occlusive splint therapy (OST) on the TMJ opening index (TOI) and sEMG of masticatory muscles. Materials and methods 112 female subjects suffering from unilateral myogenous TMD, aged 21–30 years-old, were recruited and divided into three groups: LLLT; soft occlusive splint therapy OST and a waitlist group as controls. Outcome measures TMJ opening index (TOI), Visual analogue scale (VAS), surface electromyography (sEMG). Results A significant reduction was reported in TOI, VAS and the sEMG within the LLLT and OST groups as well as significant decrease in all outcomes between groups in favor of the LLLT group (P< 0.0001). Meanwhile, there was a weak significant difference within the control group probably attributed to the analgesic. Post-hoc pairwise comparisons between groups [control vs occlusive splints, control vs low-level laser and low-level laser vs occlusive splints] revealed significant differences in the VAS and TOI [P = 0.0001; 95% CI: 0.9–2.2, 1.61–4.01, 0.65–1.96]. Conclusions Findings support an evident short term therapeutic effect of the LLLT on improving VAS, TOI and sEMG in females suffering from myogenous TMD.

scholarly journals Low-level laser therapy for temporomandibular disorders (tmd) treatment: a systematic review of randomized trials

2014 ◽  
Vol 2 (5) ◽  
pp. 376
Author(s):  
Priscila Leite ◽  
Nicole Melo ◽  
Pâmela Silva ◽  
Robinsom Montenegro ◽  
Paulo Bonan ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Temporomandibular Joint ◽  
Laser Therapy ◽  
Diagnostic Criteria ◽  
Temporomandibular Disorders ◽  
Low Level Laser Therapy ◽  
Low Level ◽  
Low Level Laser ◽  
Level Laser ◽  
Significant Difference

AIM: Conducting a systematic review of randomized clinical trials focusing on the efficacy of LLLT on pain control in patients with TMD, diagnosed by the Research Diagnostic Criteria for Temporomandibular Disorders (RDC/TMD). MATERIAL AND METHODS: Search was performed at PubMed/MEDLINE database with the terms: (1) “Laser AND temporomandibular disorders”; (2) “Laser AND temporomandibular disorders AND RDC/TMD”; (3) “Low-level laser therapy AND temporomandibular disorders”; (4) “Low-level laser therapy AND temporomandibular disorders AND RDC/TMD”; (5) “Low-level laser therapy AND temporomandibular joint dysfuntion syndrome”; (6) “Low-level laser therapy AND temporomandibular joint dysfuntion syndrome AND RDC/TMD”; (7) “Laser AND temporomandibular joint dysfuntion syndrome” (8) “Laser AND RDC/TMD”; (9) “Low-level laser therapy AND RDC/TMD”. Inclusion criteria: articles need to be randomized clinical trial performed in humans; evaluate the effect of LLLT in the treatment of TMD diagnosed by the use of RDC/TMD; published in English or Portuguese in the last 10 years. Protocol studies and pilot studies were excluded. RESULTS: Ten studies were included. The type of laser used was Gallium Aluminum Arsenide (GaAlAs) diode, with exception of 1 paper, which used super pulsed Gallium Arsenide laser. Eight studies reported decreased in pain levels, in two articles there was no statistically significant difference between test and placebo groups. CONCLUSION: In most studies, LLLT was effective in pain remission, but there is no standardization in parameters like wavelength, output power and frequency. Studies with more complex experimental designs, standardized diagnostic criteria for TMD and defined protocols for the use of LLLT are needed to determine its efficacy in the treatment of TMD.

Efficacy of Nonsurgical Mechanical Debridement With and Without Adjunct Low-Level Laser Therapy in the Treatment of Peri-Implantitis: A Randomized Controlled Trial

2020 ◽  
Vol 46 (5) ◽  
pp. 526-531 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fawaz Alqahtani ◽  
Nasser Alqhtani ◽  
Sree Lalita Celur ◽  
Darshan Devang Divakar ◽  
Abdulaziz A. Al-Kheraif ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Bone Resorption ◽  
Laser Therapy ◽  
Low Level Laser Therapy ◽  
Periodontal Pocket ◽  
Low Level ◽  
Low Level Laser ◽  
Probing Depth ◽  
Level Laser ◽  
Significant Difference

We hypothesized that in the long term (6-month follow-up), nonsurgical mechanical debridement (NSMD) with adjunct low-level laser therapy (LLLT) is more effective for the treatment of peri-implantitis than NSMD alone. The aim of the present 6-month follow-up convenience-sample cohort study was to assess the efficacy of LLLT as an adjunct to NSMD in the treatment of peri-implantitis. A questionnaire was used to collect demographic information. Patients with peri-implantitis in the test and control groups underwent NSMD with and without adjunct LLLT, respectively. Randomization was done by tossing a coin. In the test group, the laser was applied perpendicular to the periodontal pocket for 20 seconds at a constant distance of 15 mm and with a continuous wavelength (3.41 J/cm2 delivery with a 1.76 cm2 spot and average output of 0.3 W). In both groups, peri-implant probing depth, bleeding upon probing, and crestal bone resorption were assessed at baseline and at the 3-month and 6-month follow-up. Group comparisons were performed, and P &lt; .05 was considered statistically significant. Sixty-seven individuals with peri-implantitis were included. The mean age of participants who underwent NSMD with adjunct LLLT and NSMD alone was 46.5 ± 3.4 and 45.3 ± 1.1 years, respectively. At the 3- and 6-month follow-up, peri-implant (P &lt; .05), bleeding upon probing (P &lt; .05), and probing depth (P &lt; .05) were significantly higher among patients who underwent NSMD alone compared with patients who underwent NSMD with adjunct LLLT. There was no significant difference in crestal bone resorption in all patients up to the 6-month follow-up. In the short term, NSMD with adjunct LLLT was a useful treatment protocol for the treatment of peri-implant soft-tissue inflammation.

Low-level laser therapy as a non-invasive approach for body contouring: A randomized, controlled study

2009 ◽  
Vol 41 (10) ◽  
pp. 799-809 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert F. Jackson ◽  
Doug D. Dedo ◽  
Greg C. Roche ◽  
David I. Turok ◽  
Ryan J. Maloney
Keyword(s):  
Laser Therapy ◽  
Body Contouring ◽  
Low Level Laser Therapy ◽  
Controlled Study ◽  
Invasive Approach ◽  
Low Level ◽  
Non Invasive ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Low Level Laser ◽  
Level Laser

scholarly journals Low-level laser therapy: An experimental design for wound management: A case-controlled study in rabbit model

2014 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 14 ◽  
Author(s):  
HamedGhoddusi Johari ◽  
Babak Sabet ◽  
Sam Zeraatian ◽  
Bita Geramizedeh ◽  
Hossein Hodjati ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Experimental Design ◽  
Laser Therapy ◽  
Rabbit Model ◽  
Low Level Laser Therapy ◽  
Wound Management ◽  
Controlled Study ◽  
Low Level ◽  
Low Level Laser ◽  
Level Laser

scholarly journals Efficacy of low-level laser therapy and aluminum hydroxide in patients with chemotherapy and radiotherapy-induced oral mucositis

2010 ◽  
Vol 21 (3) ◽  
pp. 186-192 ◽  
Author(s):  
Aline Gouvêa de Lima ◽  
Reynaldo Antequera ◽  
Maria Paula Siqueira de Melo Peres ◽  
Igor Moysés Longo Snitcosky ◽  
Miriam Hatsue Honda Federico ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Laser Therapy ◽  
Aluminum Hydroxide ◽  
Oral Mucositis ◽  
Randomized Study ◽  
Low Level Laser Therapy ◽  
Oral Toxicity ◽  
Low Level ◽  
Low Level Laser ◽  
Level Laser ◽  
Significant Difference

This study evaluated the efficacy of low-level laser therapy (LLLT) and aluminum hydroxide (AH) in the prevention of oral mucositis (OM). A prospective, comparative and non-randomized study was conducted with 25 patients with head and neck cancer subjected to radiotherapy (RT) or radiochemotherapy (RCT). Twelve patients received LLLT (830 nm, 15 mW, 12 J/cm²) daily from the 1st day until the end of RT before each sessions during 5 consecutive days, and the other 13 patients received AH 310 mg/5 mL, 4 times/day, also throughout the duration of RT, including weekends. OM was measured using an oral toxicity scale (OTS) and pain was measured using the visual analogue scale (VAS). EORTC questionnaires were administered to the evaluate impact of OM on quality of life. The LLLT group showed lower mean OTS and VAS scores during the course of RT. A significant difference was observed in pain evaluation in the 13th RT session (p=0.036). In both groups, no interruption of RT was needed. The prophylactic use of both treatments proposed in this study seems to reduce the incidence of severe OM lesions. However, the LLLT was more effective in delaying the appearance of severe OM.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document