Dataset Information

Low-Level Laser Therapy for Temporomandibular Disorders: A Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis.

ABSTRACT: Objectives:We systematically reviewed randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of the effect of low-level laser therapy (LLLT) versus placebo in patients with temporomandibular disorder (TMD). Methods:A systematic search of multiple online sources electronic databases was undertaken. The methodological quality of each included study was assessed using the modified Jadad scale, and the quality of evidence was evaluated using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system. Results:A total of 31 RCTs were included. Total modified Jadad scale scores showed that the methodological quality was high in 30 studies and low in 1 study. Combining data from all clinically heterogeneous studies revealed positive effects of LLLT on pain relief, regardless of the visual analogue scale (VAS) score or the change of VAS score between the baseline and the final follow-up time point, while dosage analyses showed discrepant results about the effects of high or low doses for patients with TMD. Follow-up analyses showed that LLLT significantly reduced pain at the short-term follow-up. Temporomandibular joint function outcomes indicated that the overall effect favored LLLT over placebo. Conclusion:This systematic review suggests that LLLT effectively relieves pain and improves functional outcomes in patients with TMD.

SUBMITTER: Xu GZ

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5971344 | biostudies-literature | 2018

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Low-Level Laser Therapy for Temporomandibular Disorders: A Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis.

Xu Gang-Zhu GZ Jia Jie J Jin Lin L Li Jia-Heng JH Wang Zhan-Yue ZY Cao Dong-Yuan DY

Pain research & management 20180510

<h4>Objectives</h4>We systematically reviewed randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of the effect of low-level laser therapy (LLLT) versus placebo in patients with temporomandibular disorder (TMD).<h4>Methods</h4>A systematic search of multiple online sources electronic databases was undertaken. The methodological quality of each included study was assessed using the modified Jadad scale, and the quality of evidence was evaluated using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Ev ...[more]

PMID: 29861802

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionAllergic rhinitis (AR) is a common allergic disorder that impairs social and physical functioning as well as quality of life. It is characterized by sneezing, rhinorrhea, congestion, and itching which respond suboptimally to drug therapy. Low-level laser therapy (LLLT) has anti-inflammatory and immunosuppressive properties that have shown promise in some studies. We aimed to systematically review LLLT's effectiveness in treating AR and meta-analyze our findings.MethodsA systematic search of PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science was conducted on November 24, 2023. All studies investigating LLLT on AR were included, and a pre-post meta-analysis of nasal symptoms (rhinorrhea, nasal congestion, nasal itching, and sneezing) in the LLLT-treated arm was conducted. Rhinoconjunctivitis quality of life questionnaire (RQLQ) scores before and after LLLT were also meta-analyzed alongside a pairwise meta-analysis of LLLT with placebo, acupuncture, steroids/antihistamines, and ultraviolet lasers. A random-effects model was used with a conservative pre-post correlation of 0.4 and standardized mean difference (SMD) as the effect size.ResultsSixteen studies were included in this review, and we found that nasal symptoms are alleviated post-LLLT in people with AR (SMD: -1.4, 95 CI: [-2.07 to -1.13], p value <0.001). RQLQ scores were also reduced after LLLT (SMD = -0.72, 95 CI: [-0.94 to -0.50], p value <0.001), and very few adverse events were reported. This meta-analysis, however, had significant publication bias and heterogeneity. When compared to a placebo, LLLT did not significantly improve nasal symptoms (SMD: -0.69, p value = 0.167), which might mean the post-LLLT nasal symptom alleviation is due to a placebo effect. Comparisons to other treatment modalities were too few to deduce anything meaningful, although it does appear that LLLT is less effective than UV lasers.ConclusionLLLT is most likely effective at alleviating nasal symptomology and has a low likelihood of adverse event incidence, yet more high-quality studies with larger sample sizes are needed to compare LLLT to a placebo to ensure its superiority to the placebo effect, as well as non-inferiority clinical trials to compare it to standard treatments.

Project description:PurposeTemporomandibular disorder (TMD) causes masticatory muscle pain and mouth opening limitations and affects patients' ability to eat, practice oral health and perform other activities of daily living. Although the benefits of low-energy lasers in treating TMD have been reported, the results vary greatly depending on the equipment used and the energy output. This study systematically evaluated the efficacy of a low-level gallium aluminium arsenide (GaAlAs) laser treatment for TMD with myofascial pain and maxillary pain.MethodsWe searched the PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published since database inception to April 5, 2020, that compared low-level laser treatment to sham/placebo treatment or no intervention in patients suffering from TMD with myofascial pain. Three reviewers independently screened the literature, extracted data, and assessed the quality of the included studies according to the risk-of-bias tool recommended by the Cochrane Handbook V.5.1.0 (Cochrane Collaboration, London, UK). Then, a meta-analysis was performed using RevMan 5.3 and Stata 15.1 software.ResultsThe data from 8 randomized controlled trials including 181 patients were analyzed. The severity of myofascial TMD pain (measured on a visual analogue scale, VAS) at the end of treatment was significantly different between the control laser therapy and the low-level GaAlAs laser therapy (weighted mean difference [WMD] = -0.76, 95% confidence interval [CI] -1.51 to 0.01, P = .046); at 3 to 4 weeks after treatment, there was no significant difference (WMD = 1.24, 95% CI -0.04 to 2.51, P = .057). In addition, there was no significant improvement in maximum mouth opening (MMO) at the end of treatment (WMD = -0.03, 95% CI -4.13 to 4.06, P = .987) or at 3 to 4 weeks after treatment (WMD = 1.22, 95% CI -2.94 to 5.39, P = .565).ConclusionsThe results of this study suggest that there is insufficient evidence to indicate an efficacy of low-level GaAlAs laser therapy in improving TMD pain and maximal oral opening. These results suggest that clinicians should make appropriate recommendations to inform patient decision-making.

Project description:Tinnitus is a common disorder characterized by sound in the ear in the absence of external or internal stimuli. Low-level laser therapy (LLLT) was discovered enhancing tissue repair via increasing the blood microcirculation and cell proliferation in 1960s. In the last two decades, LLLT delivered to the cochlea has frequently been used to reduce the severity of tinnitus. However, whether LLLT effectively attenuates the severity of tinnitus remains controversial. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy of low-level laser therapy on adult patients with complaints of tinnitus. Systematic review and meta-analysis with trial sequential analysis. Low-level laser therapy (LLLT). Tinnitus Handicap Inventory (THI) score; improvement rates of the visual analog scale (VAS), verbal rating scale (VRS) and numeric rating scale (NRS) scores. We searched PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library from inception through 17 September 2020. Randomized control trials that involved adult patients with complaints of tinnitus, compared LLLT to a placebo and provided sufficient information for meta-analysis were considered eligible. Overall, 11 studies involving 670 patients were included. No significant difference in the overall effect according to the THI score (mean difference (MD), -2.85; 95% CI, -8.99 to 3.28; p = 0.362; I2 = 0%) and the rating scale score improvement rate (risk ratio (RR), 1.35; 95% CI, 0.81 to 2.27; p = 0.250; I2 = 67%) was demonstrated between patients receiving LLLT and those receiving a placebo. None of the subgroup analyses showed significant differences, regardless of underlying sensorineural hearing loss, the number of irradiation sessions or the wavelength used. Our meta-analysis suggests that the value of LLLT in controlling the severity of tinnitus remains unclear, in part due to the relatively small number of patients and underlying heterogeneity. More large-scale investigations of LLLT for tinnitus related to inner ear disease are required to further elucidate the therapeutic effects.

Project description:BackgroundRecent reviews have indicated that low level level laser therapy (LLLT) is ineffective in lateral elbow tendinopathy (LET) without assessing validity of treatment procedures and doses or the influence of prior steroid injections.MethodsSystematic review with meta-analysis, with primary outcome measures of pain relief and/or global improvement and subgroup analyses of methodological quality, wavelengths and treatment procedures.Results18 randomised placebo-controlled trials (RCTs) were identified with 13 RCTs (730 patients) meeting the criteria for meta-analysis. 12 RCTs satisfied half or more of the methodological criteria. Publication bias was detected by Egger's graphical test, which showed a negative direction of bias. Ten of the trials included patients with poor prognosis caused by failed steroid injections or other treatment failures, or long symptom duration or severe baseline pain. The weighted mean difference (WMD) for pain relief was 10.2 mm [95% CI: 3.0 to 17.5] and the RR for global improvement was 1.36 [1.16 to 1.60]. Trials which targeted acupuncture points reported negative results, as did trials with wavelengths 820, 830 and 1064 nm. In a subgroup of five trials with 904 nm lasers and one trial with 632 nm wavelength where the lateral elbow tendon insertions were directly irradiated, WMD for pain relief was 17.2 mm [95% CI: 8.5 to 25.9] and 14.0 mm [95% CI: 7.4 to 20.6] respectively, while RR for global pain improvement was only reported for 904 nm at 1.53 [95% CI: 1.28 to 1.83]. LLLT doses in this subgroup ranged between 0.5 and 7.2 Joules. Secondary outcome measures of painfree grip strength, pain pressure threshold, sick leave and follow-up data from 3 to 8 weeks after the end of treatment, showed consistently significant results in favour of the same LLLT subgroup (p < 0.02). No serious side-effects were reported.ConclusionLLLT administered with optimal doses of 904 nm and possibly 632 nm wavelengths directly to the lateral elbow tendon insertions, seem to offer short-term pain relief and less disability in LET, both alone and in conjunction with an exercise regimen. This finding contradicts the conclusions of previous reviews which failed to assess treatment procedures, wavelengths and optimal doses.

Dataset Information

Low-Level Laser Therapy for Temporomandibular Disorders: A Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis.

Publications

Low-Level Laser Therapy for Temporomandibular Disorders: A Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets