Effect of Laser Therapy on Chronic Osteoarthritis of the Knee in Older Subjects

The Effects of Photobiomodulation on Knee Function, Pain, and Exercise Tolerance in Older Adults: A Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

OBJECTIVE

To assess whether photobiomodulation therapy (PBMT) enhances the benefits of exercise in older adults.

DATA SOURCES

PubMed, Scopus, Medline, and Web of Science, dated to February 2023.

STUDY SELECTION

All included studies were randomized controlled trials of PBMT combined with exercise co-intervention in persons 60 years and older.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Western Ontario and McMaster University Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC-total, pain, stiffness and function), perceived pain intensity, timed Up and Go (TUG) Test, 6-min walk test (6MWT), muscle strength, and knee range of motion were included.

DATA EXTRACTION

Two researchers independently performed data extraction. Article data were extracted in Excel and summarized by a third researcher.

DATA SYNTHESIS

The meta-analysis included 14 of the 1864 studies searched in the database. No statistical differences were found between the treatment and control groups in terms of WOMAC-stiffness (mean difference [MD]=-0.31, 95% confidence interval [CI] -0.64 to 0.03), TUG (MD=-0.17, 95% CI -0.71 to 0.38), 6MWT (MD=32.2, 95% CI -44.62 to 109.01), or muscle strength (standardized mean difference=0.24, 95% CI -0.02 to 0.50). However, statistically significant differences were found for WOMAC-total (MD=-6.83, 95% CI -12.3 to -1.37), WOMAC-pain (MD=-2.03, 95% CI -4.06 to -0.01), WOMAC-function (MD=-5.03, 95% CI -9.11 to -0.96), visual analog scale/numeric pain rating scale (MD=-1.24, 95% CI -2.43 to -0.06), and knee range of motion (MD=1.47, 95% CI 0.07 to 2.88).

CONCLUSIONS

In older adults who exercise regularly, PBMT can potentially provide additional pain relief, improve knee joint function, and increase knee joint range of motion.

Effect of Low-Level Laser Therapy on Knee Range of Motion and Functional Abilities After Total Knee Arthroplasty

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to determine the effectiveness of combined low-level laser therapy (LLL) and rehabilitation in patients following recent total knee replacement (TKR).

METHODS

A double-blind randomized controlled study was conducted at the Orthopedic Department of Mansoura University Hospital. Forty-four patients were chosen from a total of 58 patients who met the inclusion criteria and were assigned randomly into control and experimental groups of equal size. Ultimately, 40 patients completed the study (20 from each group). Both groups participated in an intensive functional rehabilitation program, and the experimental group also received LLL therapy around the knee at the incisional line, the medial and lateral intra-articular space, above and below the patella, and at the popliteal fossa at low fluence (6 J/cm2, 650 nm continuous wave) and 60 s per point with a total dose of 48 J per session over 12 treatment sessions for six weeks. Knee range of motion (ROM) was measured with a digital goniometer, and functional abilities were assessed with the Arabic version of the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis (WOMAC) index.

RESULTS

There were significant differences in all variables pre- and post-treatment within each group. Before treatment, there was no significant difference in any of the measured variables between the groups (P>0.05). After treatment, there were significant differences in knee flexion ROM and WOMAC index (P<0.05) but no significant difference in knee extension ROM between the groups (P>0.05).

CONCLUSION

The addition of low-level laser therapy to a rehabilitation program post-TKR resulted in substantial enhancements in knee flexion range of motion and the WOMAC index.

A Holistic Perspective on How Photobiomodulation May Influence Fatigue, Pain, and Depression in Inflammatory Bowel Disease: Beyond Molecular Mechanisms

BACKGROUND

Numerous mechanisms, mostly molecular, have been tested and proposed for photobiomodulation. Photobiomodulation is finding a niche in the treatment of conditions that have no gold-standard treatment or only partially effective pharmacological treatment. Many chronic conditions are characterised by symptoms for which there is no cure or control and for which pharmaceuticals may add to the disease burden through side effects. To add quality to life, alternate methods of symptom management need to be identified.

OBJECTIVE

To demonstrate how photobiomodulation, through its numerous mechanisms, may offer an adjunctive therapy in inflammatory bowel disease. Rather than considering only molecular mechanisms, we take an overarching biopsychosocial approach to propose how existing evidence gleaned from other studies may underpin a treatment strategy of potential benefit to people with Crohn's disease and ulcerative colitis.

MAIN FINDINGS

In this paper, the authors have proposed the perspective that photobiomodulation, through an integrated effect on the neuroimmune and microbiome-gut-brain axis, has the potential to be effective in managing the fatigue, pain, and depressive symptoms of people with inflammatory bowel disease.

Effect of low-level laser therapy plus exercise therapy on pain, range of motion, muscle strength, and function in knee osteoarthritis - a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Knee osteoarthritis (KOA) is commonly associated with multiple musculoskeletal impairments.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this review was (1) to investigate the effectiveness of LLLT plus ET on pain, ROM, muscle strength, and function in KOA immediately after therapy and (2) whether the effectiveness of LLLT plus ET could be sustained at follow-up (4 - 32 weeks).

METHODS

Six databases were systematically searched upto December 2021 to find relevant articles. Included studies were RCTs written in English, which compared LLLT plus ET with placebo LLLT plus ET in KOA. Three independent reviewers extracted data and assessed the quality of included studies. Standard mean difference (SMD) was used in meta-analysis using random effect model.

RESULT

Of the 6307 articles, 14 RCTs (820 patients) met the inclusion criteria. The results demonstrated that there was a significant difference in pain immediately after therapy (SMD: -0.58, p = 0.001) and at follow-up (SMD: -1.35, p = 0.05) in LLLT plus ET group. There were no significant differences in knee ROM, muscle strength, and knee function outcomes immediately and at follow-up.

CONCLUSION

Our findings indicate that LLLT plus ET could be considered to alleviate pain in the KOA. LLLT reduces pain at 4-8J with a wavelength of 640-905nm per point applied for 10-16 sessions at a frequency of 2 sessions/week. An exercise therapy program at prescribed dosage involving major muscle groups might help. However, LLLT plus ET is no more effective than placebo LLLT plus ET in improving ROM, muscle strength, and function in KOA.

Effects of low-level laser therapy on impaired mobility in dogs with naturally occurring osteoarthritis

BACKGROUND

Osteoarthritis is common in the aging dog and is associated with chronic pain and impaired mobility. The main objective of this study was to determine whether low-level laser therapy (LLLT) would increase physical activity in dogs with osteoarthritis.

METHODS

Twenty-three dogs with osteoarthritis were instrumented with an accelerometer 48 h before the first LLLT session (baseline), to record daily activity. Each dog underwent six consecutive weekly laser treatments. The scores of the Canine Brief Pain Inventory and the Liverpool Osteoarthritis in Dogs' were recorded for clinical purposes, as a tool to titrate the analgesic therapy of each individual dog, before LLLT (as baseline) and then weekly for 6 weeks.

RESULTS

The number of daily activities increased during week 2 (161,674; SD, 103,666) and remained higher than baseline (93,481; SD, 107,878) until week 6 (179,309; SD, 126,044; p < 0.001). Daily step count increased from week 1 (4472; SD, 3427) compared to baseline (1109; SD, 1061) and remained higher than the baseline until the end of week 6 (8416; SD, 3166; p < 0.001). Average energy expenditure during the study period was 179 [range, 2-536] kcal/day; there were no statistically significant differences in this variable between weeks of treatment. Systemic analgesics therapy was decreased in 50% of the dogs during the study period.

CONCLUSIONS

Laser therapy may advance the management of osteoarthritis by increasing the level of activity of dogs, therefore improving their quality of life.

Adjunctive therapies in addition to land-based exercise therapy for osteoarthritis of the hip or knee

BACKGROUND

Land-based exercise therapy is recommended in clinical guidelines for hip or knee osteoarthritis. Adjunctive non-pharmacological therapies are commonly used alongside exercise in hip or knee osteoarthritis management, but cumulative evidence for adjuncts to land-based exercise therapy is lacking.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the benefits and harms of adjunctive therapies used in addition to land-based exercise therapy compared with placebo adjunctive therapy added to land-based exercise therapy, or land-based exercise therapy only for people with hip or knee osteoarthritis.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, EMBASE, CINAHL, Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro) and clinical trials registries up to 10 June 2021.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) or quasi-RCTs of people with hip or knee osteoarthritis comparing adjunctive therapies alongside land-based exercise therapy (experimental group) versus placebo adjunctive therapies alongside land-based exercise therapy, or land-based exercise therapy (control groups). Exercise had to be identical in both groups. Major outcomes were pain, physical function, participant-reported global assessment, quality of life (QOL), radiographic joint structural changes, adverse events and withdrawals due to adverse events. We evaluated short-term (6 months), medium-term (6 to 12 months) and long-term (12 months onwards) effects.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed study eligibility, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias and certainty of evidence for major outcomes using GRADE.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 62 trials (60 RCTs and 2 quasi-RCTs) totalling 6508 participants. One trial included people with hip osteoarthritis, one hip or knee osteoarthritis and 59 included people with knee osteoarthritis only. Thirty-six trials evaluated electrophysical agents, seven manual therapies, four acupuncture or dry needling, or taping, three psychological therapies, dietary interventions or whole body vibration, two spa or peloid therapy and one foot insoles. Twenty-one trials included a placebo adjunctive therapy. We presented the effects stratified by different adjunctive therapies along with the overall results. We judged most trials to be at risk of bias, including 55% at risk of selection bias, 74% at risk of performance bias and 79% at risk of detection bias. Adverse events were reported in eight (13%) trials. Comparing adjunctive therapies plus land-based exercise therapy against placebo therapies plus exercise up to six months (short-term), we found low-certainty evidence for reduced pain and function, which did not meet our prespecified threshold for a clinically important difference. Mean pain intensity was 5.4 in the placebo group on a 0 to 10 numerical pain rating scale (NPRS) (lower scores represent less pain), and 0.77 points lower (0.48 points better to 1.16 points better) in the adjunctive therapy and exercise therapy group; relative improvement 10% (6% to 15% better) (22 studies; 1428 participants). Mean physical function on the Western Ontario and McMaster (WOMAC) 0 to 68 physical function (lower scores represent better function) subscale was 32.5 points in the placebo group and reduced by 5.03 points (2.57 points better to 7.61 points better) in the adjunctive therapy and exercise therapy group; relative improvement 12% (6% better to 18% better) (20 studies; 1361 participants). Moderate-certainty evidence indicates that adjunctive therapies did not improve QOL (SF-36 0 to 100 scale, higher scores represent better QOL). Placebo group mean QOL was 81.8 points, and 0.75 points worse (4.80 points worse to 3.39 points better) in the placebo adjunctive therapy group; relative improvement 1% (7% worse to 5% better) (two trials; 82 participants). Low-certainty evidence (two trials; 340 participants) indicates adjunctive therapies plus exercise may not increase adverse events compared to placebo therapies plus exercise (31% versus 13%; risk ratio (RR) 2.41, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.27 to 21.90). Participant-reported global assessment was not measured in any studies. Compared with land-based exercise therapy, low-certainty evidence indicates that adjunctive electrophysical agents alongside exercise produced short-term (0 to 6 months) pain reduction of 0.41 points (0.17 points better to 0.63 points better); mean pain in the exercise-only group was 3.8 points and 0.41 points better in the adjunctive therapy plus exercise group (0 to 10 NPRS); relative improvement 7% (3% better to 11% better) (45 studies; 3322 participants). Mean physical function (0 to 68 WOMAC subscale) was 18.2 points in the exercise group and 2.83 points better (1.62 points better to 4.04 points better) in the adjunctive therapy plus exercise group; relative improvement 9% (5% better to 13% better) (45 studies; 3323 participants). These results are not clinically important. Mean QOL in the exercise group was 56.1 points and 1.04 points worse in the adjunctive therapies plus exercise therapy group (1.04 points worse to 3.12 points better); relative improvement 2% (2% worse to 5% better) (11 studies; 1483 participants), indicating no benefit (low-certainty evidence). Moderate-certainty evidence indicates that adjunctive therapies plus exercise probably result in a slight increase in participant-reported global assessment (short-term), with success reported by 45% in the exercise therapy group and 17% more individuals receiving adjunctive therapies and exercise (RR 1.37, 95% CI 1.15 to 1.62) (5 studies; 840 participants). One study (156 participants) showed little difference in radiographic joint structural changes (0.25 mm less, 95% CI -0.32 to -0.18 mm); 12% relative improvement (6% better to 18% better). Low-certainty evidence (8 trials; 1542 participants) indicates that adjunctive therapies plus exercise may not increase adverse events compared with exercise only (8.6% versus 6.5%; RR 1.33, 95% CI 0.78 to 2.27).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Moderate- to low-certainty evidence showed no difference in pain, physical function or QOL between adjunctive therapies and placebo adjunctive therapies, or in pain, physical function, QOL or joint structural changes, compared to exercise only. Participant-reported global assessment was not reported for placebo comparisons, but there is probably a slight clinical benefit for adjunctive therapies plus exercise compared with exercise, based on a small number of studies. This may be explained by additional constructs captured in global measures compared with specific measures. Although results indicate no increased adverse events for adjunctive therapies used with exercise, these were poorly reported. Most studies evaluated short-term effects, with limited medium- or long-term evaluation. Due to a preponderance of knee osteoarthritis trials, we urge caution in extrapolating the findings to populations with hip osteoarthritis.

Is high intensity laser therapy more effective than other physical therapy modalities for treating knee osteoarthritis? A systematic review and network meta-analysis

Background

The use of physical therapy modalities, especially high intensity laser therapy (HILT), for individuals with knee osteoarthritis (KOA) is still controversial.

Objective

To compare the effects of HILT to other physical therapy modalities on symptoms and function in individuals with KOA.

Methods

Six databases (PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, EBSCO, and PEDro) were searched in March 2022. Included studies were randomized controlled trials involving HILT conducted on individuals with KOA. The end-trial weighted mean difference (WMD) and standard deviations (SD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were analyzed.

Results

Ten studies with 580 participants were obtained, of which nine were included in the final network meta-analysis. In terms of relieving pain, HILT demonstrated the highest probability of being among the most effective treatments, with surface under the cumulative ranking (SUCRA) = 100%, and compared to a control (placebo laser or exercise or a combination of both) on the visual analog scale (VAS) for pain it demonstrated significant benefits (WMD 1.66, 95% CI 1.48–1.84). For improving self-reported function, as measured by the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) total scores, the HILT SUCRA value led with 98.9%. When individuals with KOA were treated by HILT, the improvement in stiffness was statistically significant (WMD 0.78, 95% CI 0.52–1.04) but the amount of improvement was smaller than the minimal clinically important difference (MCID).

Conclusion

The current evidence suggests that HILT may be more effective than other physical therapy modalities for improving pain and function in individuals with KOA. For improving stiffness, however, it may not be clinically effective.

Systematic review registration

[https://www.researchregistry.com], identifier [1148].

A randomized comparative study between high-intensity laser vs low-intensity pulsed ultrasound both combined with exercises for the treatment of knee osteoarthritis

OBJECTIVE

To compare the effects of high-intensity laser therapy (HILT) plus exercise therapy (ET) vs low-intensity pulsed ultrasound (LIPUS) plus ET in knee osteoarthritis (KOA).

METHODS

A single blinded randomized controlled trial in an outpatient setting. There were 60 participants with grades II and III KOA based on the radiological findings in Kellgren and Lawrence grading scale. Participants were allocated randomly into three groups, study group I (HILT+ET), study group II (LIPUS+ET), and control (ET) group. Participants in the three groups received active range of motion (ROM) exercises, muscle strengthening, and flexibility exercises. Treatment was administered 5 times/wk for two successive weeks. Primary outcomes involved visual analog scale (VAS), secondary outcomes involved knee ROM, proprioceptive accuracy and Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index scale. All outcomes were measured pre- and post-treatment.

RESULTS

The mean age of participants was 55.4 ± 6.34, 55.2 ± 4.77 and 57 ± 6.39 years in HILT+ET, LIPUS+ET and control group respectively. There were statistically significant time-by-group effects (mixed-design multivariate analysis of variance) on all measured outcomes for all groups (P < .0001). However, HILT+ET yielded better improvement than the other groups (P < .0001). Between-group comparison revealed a significant difference in all measured outcomes between study group 1 vs study group 2, and between each study group vs the control group (P = .0001).

CONCLUSION

The effect of HILT combined with exercises achieved better results in pain, knee ROM, proprioceptive accuracy and functional disability than LIPUS combined with exercises and both are better than exercises only.

Application of high-intensity laser in pain treatment of patients with knee osteoarthritis

Osteoarthritis is a rheumatic disease characterized by degeneration and decay of cartilage in the joints. As the disease worsens, the joint space narrows causing numbness and pain, which often impairs movement. In addition to pharmacological therapy, low-intensity laser (LILT), high-intensity laser (HILT) and exercise are used to treat osteoarthritis (OA) of the knee. HILT is a new modality in our country and the experience from its application is small, especially in the treatment of OA of the knee. Aim of the paper was to compare the effect of HILT with LILT in the treatment of OA of the knee. Material and methods: This was a randomized comparative unilateral blind study involving 72 patients divided into two groups. The first group was treated with HILT, the second group treated with LILT. Outcome measure was the visual analogue scale (VAS) for pain, which was made on the first and tenth day of treatment. Statistical significance was defined as p <0.05. Results: We found a significant difference between the two groups in terms of VAS score after 10 therapies  in favor to a significantly lower score, that is, less pain in the HILT group (p = 0.0035). The comparison of the VAS score between the two times in the two groups separately showed that in both, the HILT and the LILT groups, the VAS score after 10 days of therapy was significantly lower compared to thatat 0 time, for consequently p = 0.00001vsp = 0.00001. Conclusion: Treatment with HILT and LILT significantly reduces pain and stiffness in patients with OA. Patients treated with HILT had better results, i.e., had a significant reduction in pain than patients treated with LILT. HILT was more effective than LILT.

A Comparison Between Low-Level Laser Therapy and Intra-articular Ozone Injection in Knee Osteoarthritis Treatment: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Introduction: Knee osteoarthritis (KOA) is a common degenerative joint disease, causing deformity, pain and a limited joint range of motion. Modification of the lifestyle and an exercise training program are the cornerstone of treatment. Alternative therapies such as laser or ozone are commonly used, but there is not any comparative study of low-level laser therapy (LLLT) versus ozone therapy. The aim of the study was to compare the efficacy and safety of the LLLT versus ozone in patients with KOA. Methods: In this single-blinded randomized clinical trial, 60 patients with KOA were assigned to LLLT or ozone groups (n=30). The First basic pain severity, the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index (WOMAC) score and physical function were determined. Then in the LLLT group, the patients were provided with 12 sessions of LLLT. In the ozone group, 6 sessions of intra-articular injection of ozone were organized (in each session a mixture of 10 mL of bupivacaine 0.25% with 15 mL of ozone 30 μg/mL). In the middle and at the end of the intervention period, we reassessed the joint pain and physical function and the degree of improvement compared between the two groups. Results: In the middle and at the end of the treatment period in both groups, the joint pain decreased significantly. The same as pain, the self-administrated WOMAC score and the range of joint motion improved significantly in both groups. All of these variables exposed more improvement in the ozone group patients. Conclusion: The study showed that both LLLT and ozone are acceptable non-invasive methods in the non-surgical treatment of KOA. Compared to LLLT, the ozone was more effective. These methods must be considered in any patient who is not suitable for surgical interventions or does not experience enough improvement in symptoms following long periods of common exercise training programs.

Effectiveness and safety of low-level laser therapy in diabetic peripheral neuropathy: a protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Diabetic peripheral neuropathy (DPN) is one of the most common chronic complications of diabetes mellitus. The main symptoms of DPN include numbness or pain in both extremities and paresthesia (such as formication or burning sensations), which greatly affect patients' quality of life. Pharmacological treatments for DPN are associated with both uncertain therapeutic effects and adverse effects, as well as with high costs. Some clinical studies have reported that low-level laser therapy (LLLT) relieves clinical symptoms and improves nerve function in patients with DPN. We intend to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to further evaluate the effectiveness and safety of LLLT for DPN.

METHODS

The following electronic databases will be searched to retrieve literature from their inception until December 2020: MEDLINE (PubMed), Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Web of Science (the Science and Social Science Citation Index), CNKI, VIP, WanFang, and SinoMed. Simultaneously, clinical registration tests and gray literature will also be retrieved. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing LLLT with either sham LLLT, no (specific) treatment, or active conventional medical treatments will be included. The primary outcomes will be nerve conduction velocity as well as clinical scores that assess neurological function and related symptoms. The risk of bias of each study and quality of evidence will be assessed using the updated Cochrane Risk of Bias 2.0 tool and GRADE approach, respectively. A meta-analysis will then be conducted using Review Manager software version 5.3.

DISCUSSION

This study will integrate RCTs and analyze data to provide a detailed summary of the evidence relating to the effects and safety of LLLT in patients with DPN. LLLT will be compared with sham LLLT, no (specific) treatment, or active conventional medical treatments, especially in terms of neurological function, quality of life, and adverse events. In conclusion, this systematic review will generate evidence regarding the use of LLLT to treat DPN, in terms of both its efficacy and safety.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

This protocol was registered with the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews on April 2020 (registration number: CRD42020170625 ).

Efficacy of Acupoints Dual-Frequency Low-Level Laser Therapy on Knee Osteoarthritis

BACKGROUND

Knee osteoarthritis (OA) presented with knee pain and limitation of mobility is common, and it may become a chronic problem resulting in major loss of function, with related impaired activity of daily living. Current traditional therapy for knee OA includes pharmacological treatment and physiotherapy, but the efficacies are limited. An alternative noninvasive treatment low-level laser therapy (LLLT) applied to acupoints is still contradictory and the efficacy needs to be assessed.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

We conduct the randomized double-blind control study to investigate the efficacy of a dual-frequency LLLT (combines red light (780 nm) and near-infrared light (830 nm)) in patients suffering knee OA. Participates were randomly assigned into active laser therapy (ALT) and placebo laser therapy (PLT) groups. Subjects in the ALT group were separately treated by laser apparatus at the three acupoints (SP9, SP10, and EX-LE2) on their knee joints under continuous radiation for 15 min at the maximum intensity, three times per week for four weeks. The PLT group used laser apparatus of the same model according to similar procedures without laser light emission. Outcome Measurements including visual analog scale (VAS), pain pressure threshold (PPT), and Lequesne index were used.

RESULTS

A total of 30 subjects with two-sided knee OA in both groups completed the experiment. Statistically significant decreases were observed in the Lequesne index (5.27 ± 3.26 vs. 10.83 ± 3.83), conscious VAS 4 weeks after treatment (moving: 2.87 ± 1.13 vs. 5.67 ± 1.72; resting: 0.33 ± 0.62 vs. 2.67 ± 1.29), and the increase was noted in PPT (21.23 ± 1.82 kg vs. 13.02 ± 1.46 kg) in the ALT group compared with the PLT group.

CONCLUSION

It appears that the knee OA pain and disability can be decreased after a dual-frequency LLLT applied to acupoints (SP9, SP10, and EX-LE2). The clinical efficacy of LLLT is highly related to the therapeutic settings of the laser apparatus; hence, more clinical trials with diffident parameter settings are needed to be further clarified.

Molecular and Cellular Mechanisms of Arthritis in Children and Adults: New Perspectives on Applied Photobiomodulation

Juvenile idiopathic arthritis and adult rheumatoid arthritis are two major groups with chronic joint pain and inflammation, extra-articular manifestations, and high risk of comorbidities, which can cause physical and ocular disability, as well as create great socio-economic pressure worldwide. The pathogenesis of arthritis manifested in childhood and adulthood is multifactorial, unclear, and overly complex, in which immunity plays an important role. Although there are more and more biological agents with different mechanisms of action for the treatment of arthritis, the results are not as expected, because there are partial responses or non-responsive patients to these compounds, high therapeutic costs, side effects, and so on; therefore, we must turn our attention to other therapeutic modalities. Updating knowledge on molecular and cellular mechanisms in the comparative pathogenesis of chronic arthritis in both children and adults is necessary in the early and correct approach to treatment. Photobiomodulation (PBM) represents a good option, offering cost-effective advantages over drug therapy, with a quicker, more positive response to treatment and no side effects. The successful management of PBM in arthritis is based on the clinician's ability to evaluate correctly the inflammatory status of the patient, to seek the optimal solution, to choose the best technology with the best physical parameters, and to select the mode of action to target very precisely the immune system and the molecular signaling pathways at the molecular level with the exact amount of quantum light energy in order to obtain the desired immune modulation and the remission of the disease. Light is a very powerful tool in medicine because it can simultaneously target many cascades of immune system activation in comparison with drugs, so PBM can perform very delicate tasks inside our cells to modulate cellular dysfunctions, helping to initiate self-organization phenomena and finally, healing the disease. Interdisciplinary teams should work diligently to meet these needs by also using single-cell imaging devices for multispectral laser photobiomodulation on immune cells.

Guidelines versus evidence: what we can learn from the Australian guideline for low-level laser therapy in knee osteoarthritis? A narrative review

This narrative review analyses the Australian Guideline (2018) for the treatment of knee osteoarthritis (KOA) developed using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology. The Guideline recommended against the use low-level laser therapy (LLLT). Why this conclusion was reached is discussed in this review in the context of evidence provided in other systematic reviews, the latest of which was published in 2019 and which provided strong support for LLLT for knee OA. We evaluated the reference list cited for the recommendation “against” LLLT and compared this with reference lists of systematic reviews and studies published before and after the publication date of the Guideline. Eight randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of LLLT were cited in the Guideline the latest of which was published in 2012. There were seventeen additional RCTs, five of which together with one systematic review were located in the year of publication, 2018. The most recent systematic review in 2019 included 22 RCTs in its analysis. Discordance with the levels of evidence and recommendations was identified. Although GRADE methodology is said to be robust for systematically evaluating evidence and developing recommendations, many studies were not identified in the Guideline. In contrast, the latest systematic review and meta-analysis provides robust evidence for supporting the use of LLLT in knee OA. The conflict between guidelines based on opinion and evidence based on meta-analysis is highlighted. Given the totality of the evidence, we recommend that the Australian Guideline should be updated immediately to reflect a “for” recommendation.

Efeito da fotobiomodulação associada a exercícios na dor e na funcionalidade de pacientes com osteoartrite de joelho: estudo-piloto

RESUMO O objetivo do estudo foi avaliar o efeito da fotobiomodulação associada a exercícios na dor e na funcionalidade de pacientes com osteoartrite de joelho. Para isso foram recrutados 20 pacientes com osteoartrite do joelho uni ou bilateral, que foram distribuídos em dois grupos: grupo-controle (GC), que realizou aplicação de fotobiomodulação (FBM) placebo e um protocolo de exercício; e grupo fotobiomodulação (GF), que realizou aplicação ativa da FBM e o protocolo de exercício, sendo esse realizado duas vezes por semana durante oito semanas e consistindo de alongamentos passivos dos músculos de membros inferiores, straight leg raise, treinamento proprioceptivo e exercícios para o controle da marcha. A FBM foi aplicada com o aparelho cluster contendo quatro diodos de 670 nm e cinco diodos de 850 nm, com uma potência de saída de 540 mW, sendo a dose utilizada de 4 J/cm2. Os grupos foram avaliados pré e pós-tratamento com os questionários SF-36, Lequesne, Tinetti, e por meio da Escala Visual Analógica de dor (EVA). Os dados foram analisados com o método Anova, seguido do Bonferroni. Os dados indicaram melhoras significativas para o GF ao fim do tratamento para as avaliações da EVA (2±1,25 vs. 0,7±0,82; p=0,009). Embora ambos os grupos tenham obtido melhoras significativas ao longo do tratamento, não foi possível observar diferenças significativas entre eles para o restante das avaliações ao final do tratamento. Portanto, conclui-se que o uso da FBM associada a exercícios apresentou melhora da dor nos pacientes com osteoartrite de joelho, embora não tenha sido possível observar diferenças significativas no que diz respeito à funcionalidade.

Preliminary clinical experience of low-level laser therapy for the treatment of canine osteoarthritis-associated pain: A retrospective investigation on 17 dogs

Background:

Osteoarthritis (OA) is common in dogs and causes chronic pain that affects the quality of life and may not respond to analgesics.

Objective:

The objective of this study was to determine whether low-level laser therapy (LLLT) would improve the quality of life and help reducing systemic analgesics, in dogs with OA.

Methods:

Seventeen client-owned dogs diagnosed with OA and associated pain were included. The diagnosis of OA was confirmed by orthopedic and radiographic examination. Pain was evaluated in each dog with the canine brief pain inventory (CBPI), compiled by the dog owners, as well as with a visual analog scale (VAS) and the colorado state canine chronic pain scale, used by the clinician. The LLLT was performed weekly in each study dog, for a total period of 6 weeks. The CBPI was then repeated at 2, 4, 6, and 8 weeks after the first laser session, whereas the VAS was reassessed at weeks 2 and 6. The dogs were observed for the occurrence of laser-related side effects.

Results:

Both CBPI and VAS were significantly reduced after the first laser session (9.2 ± 3.8 and 5.2 ± 1.1, respectively) compared to pretreatment values (11.8 ± 3.6 and 7.6 ± 0.9, respectively; and p = 0.018 and p < 0.001, respectively) and continued to decrease over time until the end of the therapy. Based on these results and improved function, as assessed by the orthopedic surgeon, the pharmacological analgesic therapy was reduced by the clinician at week 2 in 13 of 17 dogs. Laser-related side effects were not observed.

Conclusion:

This retrospective report provides a basis for future investigations, needed to clarify whether laser therapy may be beneficial to treat canine OA-associated pain. The preliminary findings are promising and suggest that LLLT may help reducing the analgesic administration and improving client satisfaction and the quality of life of dogs with OA.

Level of pain, muscle strength and posture: effects of PBM on an exercise program in women with knee osteoarthritis - a randomized controlled trial

To evaluate the effectiveness of an exercise program associated to photobiomodulation (PBM) on pain, postural changes, functionally, and muscular strength in women, one of the risk factors, with knee osteoarthritis (OA). A randomized controlled trial, with a blinded assessor and intention-to-treat analysis and placebo control. Sixty-two participants with knee OA (with confirmed radiological diagnosis) were evaluated for this study. However, 34 were considered eligible and were randomized into two groups: EPPG - exercise and PBM placebo group (n = 17) and EPAG - exercise and PBM active group (n = 16), but one participant was excluded of EPAG. The exercise program and PBM (808 nm, 100 mW/point, 4 J/point, 56 J total, 91 J/cm²) were realized twice a week, during 8 weeks. West Ontario and the McMaster University Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) and Lequesne questionnaires, 1-repetition maximum test (1-RM) and posture evaluation software (SAPO) were used to analyze the effects of the therapies. In intragroup analysis, a significant improvement in pain WOMAC (p < 0.001), stiffness (p < 0.001), function (p < 0.001), Lequesne (p < 0.001), and 1-RM (all muscle groups) (p < 0.001) were observed. In this study, the exercise program improved pain, function, and muscle strength of all the participants. However, PBM, in the parameters used, did not optimize the effects of the exercise program in women with knee OA.

Efficacy of low-level laser therapy on pain and disability in knee osteoarthritis: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised placebo-controlled trials

OBJECTIVES

Low-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.

DESIGN

Systematic review and meta-analysis.

DATA SOURCES

Eligible 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 STUDIES

We 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 SYNTHESIS

The 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.

RESULTS

22 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.

CONCLUSION

LLLT 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 NUMBER

CRD42016035587.

Photobiomodulation via a cluster device associated with a physical exercise program in the level of pain and muscle strength in middle-aged and older women with knee osteoarthritis: a randomized placebo-controlled trial

Osteoarthritis (OA) is a chronic joint disease that leads to pain and functional incapacity. The aim of the study is to investigate the effects of the incorporation of photobiomodulation (PBM) (via cluster) into a physical exercise program on the level of pain, lower limb muscle strength, and physical capacity, in patients with knee OA. Sixty-two female volunteers with a diagnosis of knee OA were distributed in 4 groups: exercise associated with placebo PBM group, exercise associated with active PBM group, active PBM group, and placebo PBM group. Sixteen sessions of lower limb strength exercises and PBM via cluster (808 nm, 100 mW, 7 points each side, 56 J total) were performed. The level of pain, physical capacity, and lower limb muscle strength were evaluated with the use of the numeric pain rating scale (NPRS), 6-min walking test (6-MWT) and timed up and go (TUG), and maximal voluntary isometric torque (MVIT) before and after the interventions. Both groups presented a significant decrease in the level of pain when compared with the placebo-treated women. Furthermore, the 6-MWT showed that the trained groups (with or without PBM) demonstrated higher values in the distance walked comparing pre and post-treatment values. The same behavior was found for the MVIT load before and after intervention. TUG was higher for all the treated with exercise groups comparing the pre and post-treatment values. Physical exercise and PBM showed analgesic effects. However, PBM did not have any extra effect along with the effects of exercise in improving the distance walked, the TUG, and the muscle strength.Trial registration: RBR-7t6nzr.

The effect of low-level laser therapy and physical exercise on pain, stiffness, function, and spatiotemporal gait variables in subjects with bilateral knee osteoarthritis: a blind randomized clinical trial

Objective: To evaluate the effects of individual and combination therapies (low-level laser therapy and physical exercises) on pain, stiffness, function, and spatiotemporal gait variables in subjects with bilateral knee osteoarthritis (OA).Methods: Subjects with knee OA (Grades 1-3) were evaluated and randomized into four groups: Control Group (CG), untreated; Laser Group (LG), treated with laser at 808 nm, 5.6 J; Exercise Group (EG), treated with exercise; and Laser + Exercise Group (LEG), treated with laser and exercises. The treatment was carried out twice a week for 2 months. The Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) questionnaire was applied for evaluation and reevaluation; evaluation of spatiotemporal gait variables was performed using GAITRite equipment.Results: The EG showed significant improvement in pain (p = 0.006) and function (p = 0.01) according to WOMAC. Regarding gait variables, in intergroup analysis after 8 weeks all groups receiving intervention showed a significant increase in gait speed: LG versus CG (p = 0.03); EG versus CG (p = 0.04) and LEG versus CG (p = 0.005). Only the group treated with laser + exercise showed a significant increase (p = 0.009) in the cadence and duration of single right limb support (p = 0.04), and only the groups treated with exercise and laser + exercise showed significant decreases in the duration of right limb support (p = 0.035 and p = 0.003, respectively), compared to the CG.Conclusions: The group treated only with exercise showed improvement in WOMAC questionnaire scores. Regarding the gait variables, all groups undergoing the interventions showed increases in the gait speed compared to the CG. The laser and exercise combination therapy provided the best results for the other gait variables (cadence and duration of right limb support and duration of single right limb support).Implications for rehabilitationThere are differences in gait patterns in patients with knee OA, including decreased gait speed, cadence, and step length.The results shown in the present study provide additional information about the physical therapy approaches that should be chosen during clinical practical to improve gait performance in individuals with knee osteoarthritis.The improvement in gait performance is a relevant issue due to the fact that is associated to physical independence and better quality of life.

Low-level laser therapy and interferential current in patients with knee osteoarthritis: a randomized controlled trial protocol

The aim of this study is to investigate the effects of low-level laser therapy and interferential current (IFC) on pain intensity, central sensitization, muscle strength and functional capacity in patients with knee osteoarthritis. Participants will be patients aged between 50 and 80 years, with knee osteoarthritis, pain intensity ranging from 3 to 8 points (0–10 scale), Lequesne Algofunctional Index ranging from 5 to 15 points, and Kellgren & Lawrence grade ≥2. A total of 168 patients will be randomly allocated into four groups as follows: active IFC + laser sham (G1), IFC sham + active laser (G2), active IFC + laser (G3) and IFC + laser sham (G4). Evaluators will be blinded to group allocation. Primary outcomes will be pain at rest and during movement measured with the visual analog pain scale. Clinical Trials Registry (NCT02898025. Registered on 20 April 2016).

Use of electroanalgesia and laser therapies as alternatives to opioids for acute and chronic pain management

The use of opioid analgesics for postoperative pain management has contributed to the global opioid epidemic. It was recently reported that prescription opioid analgesic use often continued after major joint replacement surgery even though patients were no longer experiencing joint pain. The use of epidural local analgesia for perioperative pain management was not found to be protective against persistent opioid use in a large cohort of opioid-naïve patients undergoing abdominal surgery. In a retrospective study involving over 390,000 outpatients more than 66 years of age who underwent minor ambulatory surgery procedures, patients receiving a prescription opioid analgesic within 7 days of discharge were 44% more likely to continue using opioids 1 year after surgery. In a review of 11 million patients undergoing elective surgery from 2002 to 2011, both opioid overdoses and opioid dependence were found to be increasing over time. Opioid-dependent surgical patients were more likely to experience postoperative pulmonary complications, require longer hospital stays, and increase costs to the health-care system. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention emphasized the importance of finding alternatives to opioid medication for treating pain. In the new clinical practice guidelines for back pain, the authors endorsed the use of non-pharmacologic therapies. However, one of the more widely used non-pharmacologic treatments for chronic pain (namely radiofrequency ablation therapy) was recently reported to have no clinical benefit. Therefore, this clinical commentary will review evidence in the peer-reviewed literature supporting the use of electroanalgesia and laser therapies for treating acute pain, cervical (neck) pain, low back pain, persistent post-surgical pain after spine surgery (“failed back syndrome”), major joint replacements, and abdominal surgery as well as other common chronic pain syndromes (for example, myofascial pain, peripheral neuropathic pain, fibromyalgia, degenerative joint disease/osteoarthritis, and migraine headaches).

Effect of joint mobilization techniques for primary total knee arthroplasty: Study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Total knee arthroplasty (TKA) has become the most preferred procedure by patients for the relief of pain caused by knee osteoarthritis. TKA patients aim a speedy recovery after the surgery. Joint mobilization techniques for rehabilitation have been widely used to relieve pain and improve joint mobility. However, relevant randomized controlled trials showing the curative effect of these techniques remain lacking to date. Accordingly, this study aims to investigate whether joint mobilization techniques are valid for primary TKA.

METHODS/DESIGN

We will manage a single-blind, prospective, randomized, controlled trial of 120 patients with unilateral TKA. Patients will be randomized into an intervention group, a physical modality therapy group, and a usual care group. The intervention group will undergo joint mobilization manipulation treatment once a day and regular training twice a day for a month. The physical modality therapy group will undergo physical therapy once a day and regular training twice a day for a month. The usual care group will perform regular training twice a day for a month. Primary outcome measures will be based on the visual analog scale, the knee joint Hospital for Special Surgery score, range of motion, surrounded degree, and adverse effect. Secondary indicators will include manual muscle testing, 36-Item Short Form Health Survey, Berg Balance Scale function evaluation, Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index, proprioception, and muscle morphology. We will direct intention-to-treat analysis if a subject withdraws from the trial.

DISCUSSION

The important features of this trial for joint mobilization techniques in primary TKA are randomization procedures, single-blind, large sample size, and standardized protocol. This study aims to investigate whether joint mobilization techniques are effective for early TKA patients. The result of this study may serve as a guide for TKA patients, medical personnel, and healthcare decision makers.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

It has been registered at http://www.chictr.org.cn/showproj.aspx?proj=15262 (Identifier:ChiCTR-IOR-16009192), Registered 11 September 2016. We also could provide the correct URL of the online registry in the WHO Trial Registration. http://apps.who.int/trialsearch/Trial2.aspx?TrialID=ChiCTR-IOR-16009192.

Treatment of drug-resistant fibromyalgia symptoms using high-intensity laser therapy: a case-based review

Fibromyalgia is a chronic musculoskeletal condition characterized by widespread pain in the body and is associated with tender points at the shoulder, back and hip regions. A wide variety of pharmacologic drugs and dietary supplements have been used with limited success in treating the musculoskeletal pain. Early clinical studies with low level laser therapy (LLLT) alone or in combination with drugs commonly used to treat fibromyalgia suggested that LLLT may be effective in reducing musculoskeletal pain and stiffness, as well as the number of tender locations. However, a sham-controlled study reported that LLLT was not significantly better than the sham treatment and kinesiotape. Preliminary studies with high-intensity laser therapy (HILT) suggest that it may be more effective than LLLT for treating chronic pain syndromes. Therefore, we evaluated low (1 W), intermediate (42 W) and high level (75 W) HILT in a woman with long-standing fibromyalgia syndrome which was resistant to both standard pharmacotherapy and treatment in an interdisciplinary pain management program. The patient received a series of treatments with a HILT device (Phoenix Thera-lase) at a wavelength of 1275 nm administered at both the paraspinous region and tender points in the shoulder and hip regions. Although the 1 W treatment produced minimal symptom relief, both the 42 and the 75 W treatments produced a dramatic reduction in her overall pain, improved quality of sleep, and increased her level of physical activity for 4-10 days after these treatment sessions. This case illustrates the potential beneficial effects of using higher power levels of HILT for patients with fibromyalgia syndrome who have failed to respond to conventional interdisciplinary treatment regimens.

Safety and Effectiveness of Low-Level Laser Therapy in Patients With Knee Osteoarthritis: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Introduction: Low-level laser therapy (LLLT) was introduced as an alternative non-invasive treatment for osteoarthritis, but its effectiveness is still controversial. The main objective of this article was to determine the safety and efficacy of LLLT in patients with knee osteoarthritis (KOA). Methods: In order to gather evidence, main medical databases as well as relevant websites were browsed without time limit. We searched with appropriate keywords and strategies. After quality assessment of studies, study data were extracted by two reviewers. Standard mean difference proposed through inverse variance was used in the meta-analysis using the random-effects model. Twelve values were used for the evaluation of heterogeneity. Results: A total of 823 studies, 14 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were selected after final review. There was a significant difference between LLLT and placebo in pain at rest (P=0.02), pain at activity (P=0.01), total pain (P=0.03), WOMAC function (P=0.01), WOMAC stiffness (P=0.02) and WOMAC total (P<0.0001) in favor of the LLLT. There was no significant difference between LLLT and Placebo in WOMAC pain (P=0.09) and range of motion (P=0.1). Conclusion: In spite of some positive findings, this meta-analysis lacked data on how LLLT effectiveness is affected with important factors: wavelength, energy density, treatment duration, numbers of sessions the treatment, severity of KOA and site of application.