scholarly journals Effectiveness of Low-Level Laser Therapy with a 915 Nm Wavelength Diode Laser on the Healing of Intraoral Mucosal Wound: An Animal Study and a Double-Blind Randomized Clinical Trial

Medicina ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 55 (8) ◽  
pp. 405 ◽  
Author(s):  
Choung ◽  
Lee ◽  
Ham ◽  
Lee ◽  
Kim ◽  
...  

Background and objectives: Diode laser has been the most popular low-level laser therapy (LLLT) technique in dentistry due to its good tissue penetration, lower financial costs, small size for portable application, and convenience to use. A series of recent studies with 940 nm or 980 nm lasers demonstrated that LLLT showed positive effects after third molar extraction or periodontal flap surgery. However, the effects of LLLT on intraoral mucosal wound healing after surgical incision have not yet been determined in human clinical study. Materials and Methods: The present study was performed to determine the efficacy and safety of 915 nm wavelength low-level laser therapy (LLLT) in mucosal wound healing. A total of 108 Sprague–Dawley rats were used. They were divided into three groups: Abrasive wound group, immediate LLLT once group, and daily LLLT group. As a clinical study, a total of 16 patients with split-mouth design subjected to bilateral mandibular third molar extraction were allocated into the LLLT group and placebo group. The process of LLLT was performed on postoperative days 0, 1, and 7, and parameters related to wound healing were analyzed on days 1, 7, and 14. Results: Repeated laser irradiation promoted mucosal wound healing of the rats. In the clinical study, although there were no significant statistical differences between the LLLT and placebo groups in all inflammatory parameters, the early stage mucosal healing tendency of wound dehiscence was higher in the LLLT group than in the placebo group clinically on postoperative day 1. Conclusions: The present results showed that 915 nm LLLT could be applied safely as an auxiliary therapy for mucosal wound healing.

2016 ◽  
Vol 0 (0) ◽  
pp. 0 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kirti Chawla ◽  
ArundeepKaur Lamba ◽  
Shruti Tandon ◽  
Farrukh Faraz ◽  
Varun Gaba

2011 ◽  
Vol 27 (3) ◽  
pp. 559-566 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marta López-Ramírez ◽  
Miguel Ángel Vílchez-Pérez ◽  
Jordi Gargallo-Albiol ◽  
Josep Arnabat-Domínguez ◽  
Cosme Gay-Escoda

2013 ◽  
Vol 15 (4) ◽  
pp. 210-216 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andreia Aparecida Da Silva ◽  
Ernesto Cesar Pinto Leal-Junior ◽  
Ana Carolina Araruna Alves ◽  
Caroline Sobral Rambo ◽  
Solange Almeida Dos Santos ◽  
...  

2003 ◽  
Vol 20 (2) ◽  
pp. 97-102 ◽  
Author(s):  
Edward B. Lack ◽  
Kimberly J. Butterwick ◽  
Neil Sadick

Introduction: Liposuction has undergone many revisions since 1980, the most notable being the introduction of the tumescent technique of local anesthesia by Jeffery Klein, MD. Since then, in an effort to improve the aesthetics of the technique and the ease and safety of the procedure, other techniques have been introduced. These include superficial liposuction, UAL, external ultrasonic liposuction, mechanically assisted liposuction, and, most recently, laser-assisted liposuction. Materials and Methods: Four centers in the United States, operating under an 1RB protocol, performed liposuction with the tumescent technique of local anesthesia on specified cosmetic units of the body. One side was exposed to 635-nm laser therapy after tumescence was achieved, whereas the contralateral side was not. Observations were recorded during surgery and at 2 weeks postoperatively. Results: Observations of intraoperative technique did not show an advantage to laser-assisted liposuction. Observations of the postoperative course were equivocal, though there was evidence of reduction of edema in certain patients. Discussion: The addition of laser therapy to liposuction technique is based on years of experience demonstrating improved wound healing using a technique of low-level laser therapy. Although the recorded observations did not support an advantage to the addition of laser therapy, there was a paradoxical difference of opinion among patients and surgeons who participated in the study. These individuals believed that, compared with patients not treated with low-level laser therapy, there was at least a reduction in degree and duration of postoperative pain and induration. As low-level laser therapy may have systemic effects on wound healing, comparing treated and untreated contralateral sides may not be valid because both sides experienced improvements in postoperative course. Laser-assisted liposuction has a potential advantage, not supported by this study, in the intraoperative and postoperative course of liposuction surgery. New studies using double-blind techniques will need to be conducted.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document