Efficacy of low-level laser therapy in the treatment of TMDs: a meta-analysis of 14 randomised controlled trials

2014 ◽  
Vol 42 (4) ◽  
pp. 291-299 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. Chen ◽  
Z. Huang ◽  
M. Ge ◽  
M. Gao
2017 ◽  
Vol 18 (6) ◽  
pp. 527-533 ◽  
Author(s):  
Faezeh Eslamipour ◽  
Saeed R Motamedian ◽  
Fahimeh Bagheri

ABSTRACT Introduction To systematically review high-quality randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and meta-analysis on the effectiveness of use of ibuprofen and low-level laser therapy (LLLT) for pain control during fixed orthodontic appliance therapy. Materials and methods A web-based systematic search of PubMed and Medline database using relevant keywords was performed in August 2016 limited to the English language studies. Based on inclusion and exclusion criteria, RCTs utilizing blind approach were selected. The quality of studies was analyzed and only high-quality studies were included. Following data extraction, meta-analysis was performed by standardized mean difference Hedges’ (adjusted) g with 95% confidence interval. Results A total number of six studies (four ibuprofen and two LLLT) comprising 315 patients were included. Heterogeneity among ibuprofen studies was small, while large heterogeneity was found among LLLT studies. The results showed that both ibuprofen and LLLT could reduce pain intensity during fixed orthodontic therapy and during 17 days follow-up period. However, this reduction was statistically significant only at 6 to 24 hours postoperatively for ibuprofen and 2 hours and 3 to 7 days for LLLT (p < 0.05). Conclusion Considering the limitations of the current metaanalysis, ibuprofen could alleviate orthodontic archwire activation pain during the 1st day with relatively high level of evidence. Low-level laser therapy could reduce this pain in the long term with limited evidence. Further well-designed RCTs are required to provide more evidence. How to cite this article Eslamipour F, Motamedian SR, Bagheri F. Ibuprofen and Low-level Laser Therapy for Pain Control during Fixed Orthodontic Therapy: A Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials and Meta-analysis. J Contemp Dent Pract 2017;18(6):527-533.


Author(s):  
Parsa Firoozi ◽  
Seied Omid Keyhan ◽  
Seong-Gon Kim ◽  
Hamid Reza Fallahi

Abstract Background Orthognathic surgery such as bilateral sagittal split ramus osteotomy (BSSRO) for the treatment of mandibular deformities is one of the most common procedures in maxillofacial operations that may lead to neurosensory disturbance. In this study, we aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of low-level laser therapy (LLLT) on augmenting recovery of neurosensory disturbance of inferior alveolar nerve (IAN) in patients who underwent BSSRO surgery. Methods A comprehensive literature search was conducted by two independent authors in PubMed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Scopus, Embase, and Google Scholar electronic databases. Besides, a manual search of all textbooks and relevant articles were conducted. Searches took place in August 2020 and were limited to published and peer-reviewed articles from 2000 to 2020. All analysis was performed using the comprehensive meta-analysis (CMA) and the STATA MP (version:16) software. The weighted mean difference (WMD) using the inverse variance method and the standard mean difference (SMD) was considered for continuous variables. Results Seventy-four papers were retrieved after removing duplicate studies and finally, eight studies were assessed for qualitative synthesis and five for meta-analysis. Totally, 94 patients were included in the meta-analysis. Based on the meta-analysis, it was shown that LLLT was not effective in a short interval (0 to 48 h) after surgery, but in a period of more than 1 month after surgery, the positive results of treatment can be observed strikingly. Also, LLLT side/group showed no significant difference in some aspects of neurosensory recovery such as thermal sensation compared to the placebo side/group. Conclusions The meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials revealed that LLLT generally improves IAN sensory disturbance caused by BSSRO. Further high-quality clinical trials with longer follow-up periods and larger sample sizes are recommended.


BMJ Open ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (10) ◽  
pp. e031142 ◽  
Author(s):  
Martin Bjørn Stausholm ◽  
Ingvill Fjell Naterstad ◽  
Jon Joensen ◽  
Rodrigo Álvaro Brandão Lopes-Martins ◽  
Humaira Sæbø ◽  
...  

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.


2019 ◽  
Vol 21 (6) ◽  
pp. 407-416 ◽  
Author(s):  
Adedapo W. Awotidebe ◽  
Gakeemah Inglis-Jassiem ◽  
Taryn Young

Background. Low-level laser therapy as an adjunct to exercise is common in clinical practice; however, existing evidence for its recommendation is low. To determine whether low-level laser therapy provides additional benefits to exercise in patients with various shoulder musculoskeletal disorders. Material and methods. An electronic search was conducted on seven databases, including The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, and CINAH as well as grey literatures, for randomised controlled trials published in English from 1996 to 2018. Selected studies were independently screened and assessed for quality according to the Cochrane Grade of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation. Results. Eleven studies met the inclusion criteria for this review. Moderate evidence indicates that low-level laser therapy provides additional short-term benefit to exercise in improving overall pain (10cm-VAS) (6 RCTs, GRADE quality moderate) (WMD: 1.75; 95% CI: 1.43 to 2.07). However, low evidence indicates that low-level laser therapy provides no additional benefit to exercise for shoulder function [5 RCTs; SWMD: -0.14; 95% CI: -0.79 to 0.25] and range of motions. Conclusions. 1. Physiotherapists may consider the use of low-laser therapy as an adjunct to exercise in the short run to improve pain in patients with shoulder musculoskeletal disorders. 2. However, low-laser therapy with exercise in the short-term is no more effective than exercise alone in improving shoulder function and range of motions.


2014 ◽  
Vol 20 (2) ◽  
pp. 108-125 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sturla Haslerud ◽  
Liv Heide Magnussen ◽  
Jon Joensen ◽  
Rodrigo Alvaro Brandao Lopes‐Martins ◽  
Jan Magnus Bjordal

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document