-
Lasers in Medical Science Jun 2022Melasma is a highly prevalent and cosmetically disfiguring pigmented skin disease. The post-treatment results are often unsatisfactory. A large number of clinical trials... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Melasma is a highly prevalent and cosmetically disfiguring pigmented skin disease. The post-treatment results are often unsatisfactory. A large number of clinical trials have tried to prove the effectiveness of the combination therapy involving laser therapy, but the results have been indeterminate. This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of laser treatment for melasma via a systematic review and meta-analysis. We respectively searched 4 databases and clinicaltrials.gov as of June 8, 2021. Two researchers independently searched for literature and extracted data. Study outcomes were computed by weighted mean differences (WMD). All statistical analyses were performed by the Review Manager version 5.3, STATA version 14 software at 95% confidence interval. We obtained 22 eligible studies which involved a total of 694 patients. After the heterogeneity test and sensitivity analysis, we took a subgroup meta-analysis on the before and after treatment of different laser types. We found that most lasers and laser-based combinations were associated with reduced melasma area and severity index (MASI), such as low-fluence Q-switch 1,064-nm Nd: YAG laser (QSNYL) (WMD: - 2.76; 95% CI: - 3.53 to - 1.99), fractional ablative CO2 laser (WMD: - 9.36; 95% CI: - 12.51 to - 6.21), and fractional ablative 2940-nm Er: YAG laser (WMD: - 2,72; 95% CI: - 3.94 to - 1.49). Significant decrease was seen in neither MASI score of non-ablative 1550-nm fractional laser (WMD: - 1.29; 95% CI: - 2.80 to 0.21) and picosecond laser (WMD: - 0.58; 95% CI: - 1.43 to 0.27), nor melanin index (MI) of low-fluence QSNYL treatment (WMD: 10.17; 95% CI: - 4.11 to 24.46). When using laser to treat melasma, various adverse reactions may occur, most of which will resolve quickly without subsequent treatment, such as edema, erythema, scaling, and burning sensation after treatment. However, for patients with darker skin, there are risks of postinflammatory hyperpigmentation and hypopigmentation. The laser and laser-based combination treatment for melasma could significantly reduce the MASI score, which was showed by our systematic review and meta-analysis.
Topics: Humans; Hyperpigmentation; Laser Therapy; Lasers, Solid-State; Low-Level Light Therapy; Melanosis; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 35122202
DOI: 10.1007/s10103-022-03514-2 -
The Journal of Dermatological Treatment May 2022Keratosis pilaris (KP) is a common, benign skin condition of follicular hyperkeratosis. Although KP is asymptomatic, the cosmetic appearance of KP can lead to... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
Keratosis pilaris (KP) is a common, benign skin condition of follicular hyperkeratosis. Although KP is asymptomatic, the cosmetic appearance of KP can lead to psychosocial distress among patients. New emerging treatments are increasingly being utilized. Yet, there is little to no summative data on the treatments of KP and its subtypes.
OBJECTIVE
To summarize existing literature on treatments for KP and its subtypes.
METHODS
A comprehensive search was performed using Pubmed/MEDLINE, Embase and Web of Science databases. The search identified 1150 non-duplicated articles, and 47 articles were included in the review. The primary outcomes measured were KP treatment type and the degree of improvement following therapy.
FINDINGS
Our findings demonstrate that the most supported form of treatment for KP is laser therapy, particularly the QS:Nd YAG laser. Topical treatments - including Mineral Oil-Hydrophil Petrolat, tacrolimus, azelaic acid, and salicylic acid - are also effective at least for improving the appearance of KP.
CONCLUSION
While the measured treatment outcomes varied among studies, laser therapy appears to be the most effective form of treatment. Use of topicals also improved KP lesions.
Topics: Abnormalities, Multiple; Darier Disease; Eyebrows; Humans; Low-Level Light Therapy
PubMed: 32886029
DOI: 10.1080/09546634.2020.1818678 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Mar 2023Phototherapy is a widely accepted, effective first-line therapy for neonatal jaundice. It is traditionally used continuously but intermittent phototherapy has been... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Phototherapy is a widely accepted, effective first-line therapy for neonatal jaundice. It is traditionally used continuously but intermittent phototherapy has been proposed as an equally effective alternative with practical advantages of improved maternal feeding and bonding. The effectiveness of intermittent phototherapy compared with continuous phototherapy is unknown.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the safety and effectiveness of intermittent phototherapy compared with continuous phototherapy.
SEARCH METHODS
Searches were conducted on 31 January 2022 in the following databases: CENTRAL via CRS Web, MEDLINE and Embase via Ovid. We also searched clinical trials databases and the reference lists of retrieved articles for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-randomised trials.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included RCTs, cluster-RCTs and quasi-RCTs comparing intermittent phototherapy with continuous phototherapy in jaundiced infants (both term and preterm) up to the age of 30 days. We compared intermittent phototherapy with continuous phototherapy by any method and at any dose and duration as defined by the authors.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Three review authors independently selected trials, assessed trial quality and extracted data from included studies. We performed fixed-effect analyses and expressed treatment effects as mean difference (MD), risk ratio (RR) and risk difference (RD) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Our primary outcomes of interest were rate of decline of serum bilirubin, and kernicterus. We used the GRADE approach to assess the certainty of evidence.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 12 RCTs (1600 infants) in the review. There is one ongoing study and four awaiting classification. There was little or no difference between intermittent phototherapy and continuous phototherapy with respect to rate of decline of bilirubin in jaundiced newborn infants (MD -0.09 micromol/L/hr, 95% CI -0.21 to 0.03; I² = 61%; 10 studies; 1225 infants; low-certainty evidence). One study involving 60 infants reported no incidence of bilirubin induced brain dysfunction (BIND). It is uncertain whether either intermittent or continuous phototherapy reduces BIND because the certainty of this evidence is very low. There was little or no difference in treatment failure (RD 0.03, 95% CI 0.08 to 0.15; RR 1.63, 95% CI 0.29 to 9.17; 1 study; 75 infants; very low-certainty evidence) or infant mortality (RD -0.01, 95% CI -0.03 to 0.01; RR 0.69, 95% CI 0.37 to 1.31 I² = 0%; 10 studies, 1470 infants; low-certainty evidence). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The available evidence detected little or no difference between intermittent and continuous phototherapy with respect to rate of decline of bilirubin. Continuous phototherapy appears to be more effective in preterm infants, however, the risks of continuous phototherapy and the potential benefits of a slightly lower bilirubin level are unknown. Intermittent phototherapy is associated with a decrease in the total number of hours of phototherapy exposure. There are theoretical benefits to intermittent regimens but there are important safety outcomes that were inadequately addressed. Large, well designed, prospective trials are needed in both preterm and term infants before it can be concluded that intermittent and continuous phototherapy regimens are equally effective.
Topics: Infant; Infant, Newborn; Humans; Jaundice, Neonatal; Phototherapy; Bilirubin; Family
PubMed: 36867730
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD008168.pub2 -
Archives of Dermatological Research Jul 2023Treatment of actinic keratoses (AKs) can help lower the risk of eventual skin cancer and address field pre-cancerization. This review compares the different therapeutic... (Review)
Review
Treatment of actinic keratoses (AKs) can help lower the risk of eventual skin cancer and address field pre-cancerization. This review compares the different therapeutic options for actinic keratosis. Databases used include Medline, EMBASE, Web of Science and the Cochrane Library from inception to December 2019. Randomized control trials that were related to any approved or recognized treatment for actinic keratosis were included. 1186 studies were found, of which 80 with 6748 patients were included in the analysis. A network meta-analysis was not possible due to interstudy heterogeneity. The greatest degree of improvement was seen with photodynamic therapy (PDT) used adjunctively with other modalities, but this was not significantly different compared to other treatments. PDT, cryotherapy, imiquimod, ingenol mebutate (IMB), 5-fluorouracil (5-FU), trichloroacetic acid (TCA), and ablative fractional laser (AFXL), were all non-inferior to one another in terms of percent clearance of AKs, but the lowest rates of clearance were seen with diclofenac sodium. When results were substratified by body site, 5-FU, combination PDT and combination 5-FU with calcipotriol were the most beneficial for AKs on the head and neck, although they often caused the highest proportion of initial side effects. Absence of randomized control trials for surgical treatments and non-ablative laser limits comparison of these treatments to other modalities. Limitations include the lack of standardized outcome reporting limited the comparability of results across trials. The results of this analysis do not account for individual patient risk or cumulative risk for development of skin cancer. At present, PDT, cryotherapy, imiquimod, IMB, 5-FU, TCA, AFXL, and combination treatments are similarly efficacious in reducing AKs in immunocompetent patients.Registration: N/A.
Topics: Humans; Keratosis, Actinic; Imiquimod; Photochemotherapy; Treatment Outcome; Skin Neoplasms; Fluorouracil
PubMed: 36454335
DOI: 10.1007/s00403-022-02490-5 -
Physiotherapy Mar 2022When treating knee osteoarthritis (KOA), rehabilitation exercise is often combined with low-level (LLLT) or high-intensity laser therapy (HILT). However, the... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Effects of low-level and high-intensity laser therapy as adjunctive to rehabilitation exercise on pain, stiffness and function in knee osteoarthritis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
BACKGROUND
When treating knee osteoarthritis (KOA), rehabilitation exercise is often combined with low-level (LLLT) or high-intensity laser therapy (HILT). However, the effectiveness of these combinations is still uncertain.
OBJECTIVE
To examine the effects of LLLT or HILT combined with rehabilitation exercise (LLLT+E or HILT+E) on pain, stiffness and function in KOA.
DATA SOURCES
Five databases (PubMed, Web of Science, CINAHL, PEDro and SPORTDiscus) were searched for relevant studies published up to 31 December 2019.
STUDY SELECTION
KOA randomised controlled trials, LLLT+E or HILT+E against exercise alone with or without placebo laser, reported clinical outcomes, human studies and English language.
DATA SYNTHESIS
Methodological quality was assessed by the PEDro and Cochrane risk-of-bias scales, and the meta-analysis was undertaken using RevMan 5.3.
RESULTS
Of the 10 retrieved studies, six investigated LLLT+E, three on HILT+E, and one evaluated both. All the studies had high PEDro scores. However, as most of the studies employed a single type of laser therapy, only indirect comparison of LLLT+E and HILT+E was possible. This study found all treatment modalities were effective in reducing KOA symptoms. Interestingly, relative to control, the meta-analysis showed significant improvements in knee pain, stiffness and function for the HILT+E.
CONCLUSION
Both LLLT and HILT are beneficial as adjuncts to rehabilitation exercise in the management of KOA. Based on an indirect comparison, the HILT+E seems to have higher efficacy in reducing knee pain and stiffness, and in increasing function. To confirm this finding, a direct comparative investigation of the two types of laser therapy may be necessary. Systematic review registration PROSPERO ID CRD42020206228.
Topics: Exercise Therapy; Humans; Laser Therapy; Low-Level Light Therapy; Osteoarthritis, Knee; Pain
PubMed: 34654554
DOI: 10.1016/j.physio.2021.03.011 -
Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) Jul 2022Melasma is a common pigmentary disorder with a complex pathogenesis, of which the treatment is challenging. Conventional treatment often leads to inconsistent results... (Review)
Review
Melasma is a common pigmentary disorder with a complex pathogenesis, of which the treatment is challenging. Conventional treatment often leads to inconsistent results with unexpected pigmentary side effects and high recurrence rates. Recently, the low-fluence Q-switched Nd:YAG laser (LFQSNY) has been widely used for treating melasma, especially in Asia. We reviewed literatures on the LFQSNY treatment of melasma published between 2009 and May 2022 to evaluate the efficacy and adverse events, including its combination therapy. A systematic PubMed search was conducted and a total of 42 articles were included in this study. It was hard to summarize the heterogenous studies, but LFQSNY appeared to be a generally effective and safe treatment for melasma considering the results of previous conventional therapies. However, mottled hypopigmentation has been occasionally reported to develop and persist as an adverse event of LFQSNY, which may be associated with the high accumulated laser energy. When used aggressively, even LFQSNY can induce hyperpigmentation via unwanted inflammation, especially in darker skin. Although few studies have reported considerable recurrence rates three months after treatment, unfortunately, there is a lack of the long-term follow-up results of LFQSNY in melasma. To enhance the effectiveness and reduce the adverse events, LFQSNY has been used in combination with other treatment modalities in melasma, including topical bleaching agents, oral tranexamic acid, chemical peeling, or diverse energy-based devices, which generally reduced side effects with or without significant superior efficacy compared to LFQSNY alone.
Topics: Combined Modality Therapy; Humans; Hyperpigmentation; Lasers, Solid-State; Low-Level Light Therapy; Melanosis; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 35888655
DOI: 10.3390/medicina58070936 -
Journal of Sleep Research Dec 2023In the management of insomnia, physicians and patients are seeking alternative therapeutics to sleeping pills, in addition to sleep hygiene and cognitive behavioural... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
In the management of insomnia, physicians and patients are seeking alternative therapeutics to sleeping pills, in addition to sleep hygiene and cognitive behavioural therapy. Bright light therapy (LT) has proven its efficacy in circadian and mood disorders. We conducted a systematic literature review and meta-analysis according to Cochrane and PRISMA guidelines and using the databases Medline, Cochrane, and Web of Science, with a special focus on light therapy and insomnia. Twenty-two studies with a total of 685 participants were included, five of which with a high level of proof. Meta-analysis was performed with 13 of them: light therapy for insomnia compared with control conditions significantly improved wake after sleep onset (WASO: SMD = -0.61 [-1.11, -0.11]; p = 0.017; weighted difference of 11.2 min ±11.5 based on actigraphy, and SMD = -1.09 [-1.43, -0.74] (p < 0.001) weighted difference of -36.4 min ±15.05) based on sleep diary, but no other sleep measures such as sleep latency, total sleep time (TST), or sleep efficiency. Qualitative analysis of the review showed some improvement mainly in subjective measures. Morning light exposure advanced sleep-wake rhythms and evening exposure led to a delay. No worsening was observed in objective nor subjective measures, except for TST in one study with evening exposure. A light dose-response may exist but the studies' heterogeneity and publication bias limit the interpretation. To conclude, light therapy shows some effectiveness for sleep maintenance in insomnia disorders, but further research is needed to refine the light parameters to be chosen according to the type of insomnia, in the hope of developing personalised therapeutics.
Topics: Humans; Sleep Initiation and Maintenance Disorders; Sleep; Phototherapy; Cognitive Behavioral Therapy; Polysomnography; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 37002704
DOI: 10.1111/jsr.13895 -
Dermatologic Therapy May 2021Existing guidelines form no consensus for alopecia areata (AA) treatment due to the absence of a universal standard treatment and arbitrary selection of reference arms... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Existing guidelines form no consensus for alopecia areata (AA) treatment due to the absence of a universal standard treatment and arbitrary selection of reference arms in randomized control trials (RCTs). The aim is to identify the best treatment and to rank treatments using systematic review and network meta-analysis. Data were extracted by the two investigators independently. Odds ratio (OR) of treatment success rate was pooled using the frequentist weighted least squares approach to random-model network meta-analysis. RCTs providing data of treatment success rate from PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and manual search were included. About 54 RCTs consisting of 49 treatments and 3149 patients were included. Pentoxifylline plus topical corticosteroids had the highest treatment success rate compared with "no treatment," followed by pentoxifylline alone, topical calcipotriol plus narrowband ultraviolet radiation B phototherapy, topical calcipotriol, intralesional corticosteroids, systemic corticosteroids, minoxidil plus topical corticosteroids, topical bimatoprost, psoralen ultraviolet radiation A phototherapy, and tofacitinib. Even with the network meta-analysis, the best treatment because of independent loops and wide confidence intervals could not be identified. Treatment options above may be reasonable strategies, but further comparison is required.
Topics: Alopecia Areata; Humans; Minoxidil; Network Meta-Analysis; Phototherapy; Ultraviolet Therapy
PubMed: 33631058
DOI: 10.1111/dth.14916 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Oct 2021Atopic eczema (AE), also known as atopic dermatitis, is a chronic inflammatory skin condition that causes significant burden. Phototherapy is sometimes used to treat AE... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Atopic eczema (AE), also known as atopic dermatitis, is a chronic inflammatory skin condition that causes significant burden. Phototherapy is sometimes used to treat AE when topical treatments, such as corticosteroids, are insufficient or poorly tolerated.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effects of phototherapy for treating AE.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Skin Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and ClinicalTrials.gov to January 2021.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised controlled trials in adults or children with any subtype or severity of clinically diagnosed AE. Eligible comparisons were any type of phototherapy versus other forms of phototherapy or any other treatment, including placebo or no treatment.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We used standard Cochrane methodology. For key findings, we used RoB 2.0 to assess bias, and GRADE to assess certainty of the evidence. Primary outcomes were physician-assessed signs and patient-reported symptoms. Secondary outcomes were Investigator Global Assessment (IGA), health-related quality of life (HRQoL), safety (measured as withdrawals due to adverse events), and long-term control.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 32 trials with 1219 randomised participants, aged 5 to 83 years (mean: 28 years), with an equal number of males and females. Participants were recruited mainly from secondary care dermatology clinics, and study duration was, on average, 13 weeks (range: 10 days to one year). We assessed risk of bias for all key outcomes as having some concerns or high risk, due to missing data, inappropriate analysis, or insufficient information to assess selective reporting. Assessed interventions included: narrowband ultraviolet B (NB-UVB; 13 trials), ultraviolet A1 (UVA1; 6 trials), broadband ultraviolet B (BB-UVB; 5 trials), ultraviolet AB (UVAB; 2 trials), psoralen plus ultraviolet A (PUVA; 2 trials), ultraviolet A (UVA; 1 trial), unspecified ultraviolet B (UVB; 1 trial), full spectrum light (1 trial), Saalmann selective ultraviolet phototherapy (SUP) cabin (1 trial), saltwater bath plus UVB (balneophototherapy; 1 trial), and excimer laser (1 trial). Comparators included placebo, no treatment, another phototherapy, topical treatment, or alternative doses of the same treatment. Results for key comparisons are summarised (for scales, lower scores are better): NB-UVB versus placebo/no treatment There may be a larger reduction in physician-assessed signs with NB-UVB compared to placebo after 12 weeks of treatment (mean difference (MD) -9.4, 95% confidence interval (CI) -3.62 to -15.18; 1 trial, 41 participants; scale: 0 to 90). Two trials reported little difference between NB-UVB and no treatment (37 participants, four to six weeks of treatment); another reported improved signs with NB-UVB versus no treatment (11 participants, nine weeks of treatment). NB-UVB may increase the number of people reporting reduced itch after 12 weeks of treatment compared to placebo (risk ratio (RR) 1.72, 95% CI 1.10 to 2.69; 1 trial, 40 participants). Another trial reported very little difference in itch severity with NB-UVB (25 participants, four weeks of treatment). The number of participants with moderate to greater global improvement may be higher with NB-UVB than placebo after 12 weeks of treatment (RR 2.81, 95% CI 1.10 to 7.17; 1 trial, 41 participants). NB-UVB may not affect rates of withdrawal due to adverse events. No withdrawals were reported in one trial of NB-UVB versus placebo (18 participants, nine weeks of treatment). In two trials of NB-UVB versus no treatment, each reported one withdrawal per group (71 participants, 8 to 12 weeks of treatment). We judged that all reported outcomes were supported with low-certainty evidence, due to risk of bias and imprecision. No trials reported HRQoL. NB-UVB versus UVA1 We judged the evidence for NB-UVB compared to UVA1 to be very low certainty for all outcomes, due to risk of bias and imprecision. There was no evidence of a difference in physician-assessed signs after six weeks (MD -2.00, 95% CI -8.41 to 4.41; 1 trial, 46 participants; scale: 0 to 108), or patient-reported itch after six weeks (MD 0.3, 95% CI -1.07 to 1.67; 1 trial, 46 participants; scale: 0 to 10). Two split-body trials (20 participants, 40 sides) also measured these outcomes, using different scales at seven to eight weeks; they reported lower scores with NB-UVB. One trial reported HRQoL at six weeks (MD 2.9, 95% CI -9.57 to 15.37; 1 trial, 46 participants; scale: 30 to 150). One split-body trial reported no withdrawals due to adverse events over 12 weeks (13 participants). No trials reported IGA. NB-UVB versus PUVA We judged the evidence for NB-UVB compared to PUVA (8-methoxypsoralen in bath plus UVA) to be very low certainty for all reported outcomes, due to risk of bias and imprecision. There was no evidence of a difference in physician-assessed signs after six weeks (64.1% reduction with NB-UVB versus 65.7% reduction with PUVA; 1 trial, 10 participants, 20 sides). There was no evidence of a difference in marked improvement or complete remission after six weeks (odds ratio (OR) 1.00, 95% CI 0.13 to 7.89; 1 trial, 9/10 participants with both treatments). One split-body trial reported no withdrawals due to adverse events in 10 participants over six weeks. The trials did not report patient-reported symptoms or HRQoL. UVA1 versus PUVA There was very low-certainty evidence, due to serious risk of bias and imprecision, that PUVA (oral 5-methoxypsoralen plus UVA) reduced physician-assessed signs more than UVA1 after three weeks (MD 11.3, 95% CI -0.21 to 22.81; 1 trial, 40 participants; scale: 0 to 103). The trial did not report patient-reported symptoms, IGA, HRQoL, or withdrawals due to adverse events. There were no eligible trials for the key comparisons of UVA1 or PUVA compared with no treatment. Adverse events Reported adverse events included low rates of phototoxic reaction, severe irritation, UV burn, bacterial superinfection, disease exacerbation, and eczema herpeticum.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Compared to placebo or no treatment, NB-UVB may improve physician-rated signs, patient-reported symptoms, and IGA after 12 weeks, without a difference in withdrawal due to adverse events. Evidence for UVA1 compared to NB-UVB or PUVA, and NB-UVB compared to PUVA was very low certainty. More information is needed on the safety and effectiveness of all aspects of phototherapy for treating AE.
Topics: Adult; Child; Dermatitis, Atopic; Eczema; Female; Humans; Male; Phototherapy; Quality of Life; Ultraviolet Therapy
PubMed: 34709669
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD013870.pub2 -
Dental and Medical Problems 2023Laser protocols for the treatment of dentin hypersensitivity (DH) have not yet been studied systematically. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Laser protocols for the treatment of dentin hypersensitivity (DH) have not yet been studied systematically.
OBJECTIVES
The present study aimed to review clinical trials on the treatment of DH with laser therapy through a systematic review and meta-analysis.
MATERIAL AND METHODS
The search of electronic databases resulted in 562 publications up to April 2020. The inclusion criteria were studies carried out on humans and reporting on the treatment of DH with laser therapy. Case reports, literature reviews and systematic reviews were excluded. Selected by abstract, potentially eligible papers were read in full (n = 160). Independent examiners performed data extraction and the assessment of the risk of bias.
RESULTS
A total of 34 studies were included in the analysis, and 11 in the quantitative analysis. It was observed that most studies followed up patients for a maximum of 6 months (55%). Through the meta-analysis, we observed statistically significant differences between the average pain before and after 3 months of treatment with highand low-power lasers. However, through indirect comparisons, it was observed that the high-power laser showed a greater tendency to reduce the pain levels after 3 months of treatment as compared to the low-power laser, but without a statistically significant difference.
CONCLUSIONS
It was possible to conclude that regardless of the type of laser used in the treatment of DH, this treatment is an effective option for the control of pain symptoms. However, it was not possible to establish a defined treatment protocol, since the evaluation methods are very different from each other. Text for Rewiew and clinical cases.
Topics: Humans; Dentin Sensitivity; Laser Therapy; Low-Level Light Therapy; Treatment Outcome; Lasers
PubMed: 37023343
DOI: 10.17219/dmp/151482