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: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.

Project description:BackgroundBreast cancer related lymphedema (BCRL) is a prevalent complication secondary to cancer treatments which significantly impacts the physical and psychological health of breast cancer survivors. Previous research shows increasing use of low level laser therapy (LLLT), now commonly referred to as photobiomodulation (PBM) therapy, for BCRL. This systematic review evaluated the effectiveness of LLLT (PBM) in the management of BCRL.MethodsClinical trials were searched in PubMed, AMED, Web of Science, and China National Knowledge Infrastructure up to November 2016. Two reviewers independently assessed the methodological quality and adequacy of LLLT (PBM) in these clinical trials. Primary outcome measures were limb circumference/volume, and secondary outcomes included pain intensity and range of motion. Because data were clinically heterogeneous, best evidence synthesis was performed.ResultsEleven clinical trials were identified, of which seven randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were chosen for analysis. Overall, the methodological quality of included RCTs was high, whereas the reporting of treatment parameters was poor. Results indicated that there is strong evidence (three high quality trials) showing LLLT (PBM) was more effective than sham treatment for limb circumference/volume reduction at a short-term follow-up. There is moderate evidence (one high quality trial) indicating that LLLT (PBM) was more effective than sham laser for short-term pain relief, and limited evidence (one low quality trial) that LLLT (PBM) was more effective than no treatment for decreasing limb swelling at short-term follow-up.ConclusionsBased upon the current systematic review, LLLT (PBM) may be considered an effective treatment approach for women with BCRL. Due to the limited numbers of published trials available, there is a clear need for well-designed high-quality trials in this area. The optimal treatment parameters for clinical application have yet to be elucidated.

Project description:ObjectivesLow-level laser therapy (LLLT) is not recommended in major knee osteoarthritis (KOA) treatment guidelines. We investigated whether a LLLT dose-response relationship exists in KOA.DesignSystematic review and meta-analysis.Data sourcesEligible articles were identified through PubMed, Embase, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Physiotherapy Evidence Database and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials on 18 February 2019, reference lists, a book, citations and experts in the field.Eligibility criteria for selecting studiesWe solely included randomised placebo-controlled trials involving participants with KOA according to the American College of Rheumatology and/or Kellgren/Lawrence criteria, in which LLLT was applied to participants' knee(s). There were no language restrictions.Data extraction and synthesisThe included trials were synthesised with random effects meta-analyses and subgrouped by dose using the World Association for Laser Therapy treatment recommendations. Cochrane's risk-of-bias tool was used.Results22 trials (n=1063) were meta-analysed. Risk of bias was insignificant. Overall, pain was significantly reduced by LLLT compared with placebo at the end of therapy (14.23 mm Visual Analogue Scale (VAS; 95% CI 7.31 to 21.14)) and during follow-ups 1-12 weeks later (15.92 mm VAS (95% CI 6.47 to 25.37)). The subgroup analysis revealed that pain was significantly reduced by the recommended LLLT doses compared with placebo at the end of therapy (18.71 mm (95% CI 9.42 to 27.99)) and during follow-ups 2-12 weeks after the end of therapy (23.23 mm VAS (95% CI 10.60 to 35.86)). The pain reduction from the recommended LLLT doses peaked during follow-ups 2-4 weeks after the end of therapy (31.87 mm VAS significantly beyond placebo (95% CI 18.18 to 45.56)). Disability was also statistically significantly reduced by LLLT. No adverse events were reported.ConclusionLLLT reduces pain and disability in KOA at 4-8 J with 785-860 nm wavelength and at 1-3 J with 904 nm wavelength per treatment spot.Prospero registration numberCRD42016035587.

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