Microcirculatory Response to Photobiomodulation—Why Some Respond and Others Do Not: A Randomized Controlled Study
Background and Objectives Photobiomodulation (PBM), a non‐ionizing, non‐thermal irradiation, used clinically to accelerate wound healing and inhibit pain, was previously shown to increase blood flow. However, some individuals respond to PBM, but others do not. The purpose of this study was to invest...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Lasers in surgery and medicine 2020-11, Vol.52 (9), p.863-872 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 872 |
---|---|
container_issue | 9 |
container_start_page | 863 |
container_title | Lasers in surgery and medicine |
container_volume | 52 |
creator | Gavish, Lilach Hoffer, Oshrit Rabin, Neta Halak, Moshe Shkilevich, Simon Shayovitz, Yuval Weizman, Gal Haim, Ortal Gavish, Benjamin Gertz, S. David Ovadia‐Blechman, Zehava |
description | Background and Objectives
Photobiomodulation (PBM), a non‐ionizing, non‐thermal irradiation, used clinically to accelerate wound healing and inhibit pain, was previously shown to increase blood flow. However, some individuals respond to PBM, but others do not. The purpose of this study was to investigate factors affecting this patient‐specific response using advanced, noninvasive methods for monitoring microcirculatory activity.
Study Design/Materials and Methods
In this prospective, randomized controlled clinical trial (NCT03357523), 20 healthy non‐smoking volunteers (10:10 males:females, 30 ± 8 years old) were randomized to receive either red‐ (633 nm and 70 W/cm2) or near‐infrared light (830 nm and 55 mW/cm2) over the wrist for 5 minutes. Photoplethysmography, laser Doppler flowmetry, and thermal imaging were used to monitor palm microcirculatory blood volume, blood flow, and skin temperature, respectively, before, during, and 20 minutes after irradiation. Participants with skin temperature change ≥0.5°C from baseline were considered “responders”.
Results
Near‐infrared PBM was found to induce a 27% increase in microcirculatory flow that increased to 54% during the 20‐minute follow‐up period (P = 0.049 and P = 0.004, respectively), but red light PBM did not increase the median flow. Only 10 of 20 participants were responders by thermal imaging (i.e., ≥0.5°C from baseline), and their initial skin temperature was between 33 and 37.5°C. The non‐responders had either “hot” hands (≥37.5°C) or “cold” hands (≤33°C). In responders, the meantime to 20% increase in microcirculatory blood volume and blood flow was less than 2.5 minutes after initiation of PBM irradiation.
Conclusions
We demonstrated that PBM induces arteriolar vasodilatation that results in both immediate and long‐lasting increased capillary flow and tissue perfusion in healthy individuals. This response was wavelength‐dependent and modified by skin temperature. These findings regarding physiological parameters associated with sensitivity or resistance to PBM provide information of direct relevance for patient‐specific therapy. Lasers Surg. Med. © 2020 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1002/lsm.23225 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_2447499766</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2447499766</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3685-747e2e72b71222eea6a765c1ce7eb04c5ceb33049386ed91a3aa0a57a55be15a3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kEtOwzAQhi0EouWx4ALIEisWLbYT2w07VJ5SSxEFsYycZFCDkkyxE6Gw4hCckJPgksKOxWhGM5_-kT5CDjgbcsbESeHKoQiEkBukz1mkBhFnfJP0GffziEWiR3ace2GMBYLpbdLzTYVKij5x0zy1mOY2bQpTo23pPbglVg5ojfRugTUmOZaYrc45Vl8fn0-Lls6xhDWZUeNrVi_AOnqO9BbrU3pG7_0Wy_wdMjrGqrZYFH6c103W7pGtZ1M42F_3XfJ4efEwvh5MZlc347PJIA3USA50qEGAFonmQggAo4xWMuUpaEhYmMoUkiBgYRSMFGQRN4ExzEhtpEyASxPskqMud2nxtQFXxy_Y2Mq_jEUY6jCKtFKeOu4o78E5C8_x0ualsW3MWbzSG3u98Y9ezx6uE5ukhOyP_PXpgZMOeMsLaP9PiifzaRf5Ddc3hkE</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2447499766</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Microcirculatory Response to Photobiomodulation—Why Some Respond and Others Do Not: A Randomized Controlled Study</title><source>Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete</source><creator>Gavish, Lilach ; Hoffer, Oshrit ; Rabin, Neta ; Halak, Moshe ; Shkilevich, Simon ; Shayovitz, Yuval ; Weizman, Gal ; Haim, Ortal ; Gavish, Benjamin ; Gertz, S. David ; Ovadia‐Blechman, Zehava</creator><creatorcontrib>Gavish, Lilach ; Hoffer, Oshrit ; Rabin, Neta ; Halak, Moshe ; Shkilevich, Simon ; Shayovitz, Yuval ; Weizman, Gal ; Haim, Ortal ; Gavish, Benjamin ; Gertz, S. David ; Ovadia‐Blechman, Zehava</creatorcontrib><description>Background and Objectives
Photobiomodulation (PBM), a non‐ionizing, non‐thermal irradiation, used clinically to accelerate wound healing and inhibit pain, was previously shown to increase blood flow. However, some individuals respond to PBM, but others do not. The purpose of this study was to investigate factors affecting this patient‐specific response using advanced, noninvasive methods for monitoring microcirculatory activity.
Study Design/Materials and Methods
In this prospective, randomized controlled clinical trial (NCT03357523), 20 healthy non‐smoking volunteers (10:10 males:females, 30 ± 8 years old) were randomized to receive either red‐ (633 nm and 70 W/cm2) or near‐infrared light (830 nm and 55 mW/cm2) over the wrist for 5 minutes. Photoplethysmography, laser Doppler flowmetry, and thermal imaging were used to monitor palm microcirculatory blood volume, blood flow, and skin temperature, respectively, before, during, and 20 minutes after irradiation. Participants with skin temperature change ≥0.5°C from baseline were considered “responders”.
Results
Near‐infrared PBM was found to induce a 27% increase in microcirculatory flow that increased to 54% during the 20‐minute follow‐up period (P = 0.049 and P = 0.004, respectively), but red light PBM did not increase the median flow. Only 10 of 20 participants were responders by thermal imaging (i.e., ≥0.5°C from baseline), and their initial skin temperature was between 33 and 37.5°C. The non‐responders had either “hot” hands (≥37.5°C) or “cold” hands (≤33°C). In responders, the meantime to 20% increase in microcirculatory blood volume and blood flow was less than 2.5 minutes after initiation of PBM irradiation.
Conclusions
We demonstrated that PBM induces arteriolar vasodilatation that results in both immediate and long‐lasting increased capillary flow and tissue perfusion in healthy individuals. This response was wavelength‐dependent and modified by skin temperature. These findings regarding physiological parameters associated with sensitivity or resistance to PBM provide information of direct relevance for patient‐specific therapy. Lasers Surg. Med. © 2020 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0196-8092</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1096-9101</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1002/lsm.23225</identifier><identifier>PMID: 32064652</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: Wiley Subscription Services, Inc</publisher><subject>Blood ; Blood flow ; Blood volume ; body temperature regulation ; Capillary flow ; Doppler effect ; Heat detection ; Infrared radiation ; Irradiation ; Lasers ; laser‐Doppler flowmetry ; Light therapy ; low‐level laser therapy ; microcirculation ; Pain ; Parameter modification ; Parameter sensitivity ; Perfusion ; photoplethysmography ; Skin ; Skin temperature ; Thermal imaging ; Vasodilation ; Wound healing ; Wrist</subject><ispartof>Lasers in surgery and medicine, 2020-11, Vol.52 (9), p.863-872</ispartof><rights>2020 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.</rights><rights>2020 Wiley Periodicals LLC</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3685-747e2e72b71222eea6a765c1ce7eb04c5ceb33049386ed91a3aa0a57a55be15a3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3685-747e2e72b71222eea6a765c1ce7eb04c5ceb33049386ed91a3aa0a57a55be15a3</cites><orcidid>0000-0003-0392-8958</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002%2Flsm.23225$$EPDF$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002%2Flsm.23225$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,778,782,1414,27911,27912,45561,45562</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32064652$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Gavish, Lilach</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hoffer, Oshrit</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rabin, Neta</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Halak, Moshe</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Shkilevich, Simon</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Shayovitz, Yuval</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Weizman, Gal</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Haim, Ortal</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gavish, Benjamin</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gertz, S. David</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ovadia‐Blechman, Zehava</creatorcontrib><title>Microcirculatory Response to Photobiomodulation—Why Some Respond and Others Do Not: A Randomized Controlled Study</title><title>Lasers in surgery and medicine</title><addtitle>Lasers Surg Med</addtitle><description>Background and Objectives
Photobiomodulation (PBM), a non‐ionizing, non‐thermal irradiation, used clinically to accelerate wound healing and inhibit pain, was previously shown to increase blood flow. However, some individuals respond to PBM, but others do not. The purpose of this study was to investigate factors affecting this patient‐specific response using advanced, noninvasive methods for monitoring microcirculatory activity.
Study Design/Materials and Methods
In this prospective, randomized controlled clinical trial (NCT03357523), 20 healthy non‐smoking volunteers (10:10 males:females, 30 ± 8 years old) were randomized to receive either red‐ (633 nm and 70 W/cm2) or near‐infrared light (830 nm and 55 mW/cm2) over the wrist for 5 minutes. Photoplethysmography, laser Doppler flowmetry, and thermal imaging were used to monitor palm microcirculatory blood volume, blood flow, and skin temperature, respectively, before, during, and 20 minutes after irradiation. Participants with skin temperature change ≥0.5°C from baseline were considered “responders”.
Results
Near‐infrared PBM was found to induce a 27% increase in microcirculatory flow that increased to 54% during the 20‐minute follow‐up period (P = 0.049 and P = 0.004, respectively), but red light PBM did not increase the median flow. Only 10 of 20 participants were responders by thermal imaging (i.e., ≥0.5°C from baseline), and their initial skin temperature was between 33 and 37.5°C. The non‐responders had either “hot” hands (≥37.5°C) or “cold” hands (≤33°C). In responders, the meantime to 20% increase in microcirculatory blood volume and blood flow was less than 2.5 minutes after initiation of PBM irradiation.
Conclusions
We demonstrated that PBM induces arteriolar vasodilatation that results in both immediate and long‐lasting increased capillary flow and tissue perfusion in healthy individuals. This response was wavelength‐dependent and modified by skin temperature. These findings regarding physiological parameters associated with sensitivity or resistance to PBM provide information of direct relevance for patient‐specific therapy. Lasers Surg. Med. © 2020 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.</description><subject>Blood</subject><subject>Blood flow</subject><subject>Blood volume</subject><subject>body temperature regulation</subject><subject>Capillary flow</subject><subject>Doppler effect</subject><subject>Heat detection</subject><subject>Infrared radiation</subject><subject>Irradiation</subject><subject>Lasers</subject><subject>laser‐Doppler flowmetry</subject><subject>Light therapy</subject><subject>low‐level laser therapy</subject><subject>microcirculation</subject><subject>Pain</subject><subject>Parameter modification</subject><subject>Parameter sensitivity</subject><subject>Perfusion</subject><subject>photoplethysmography</subject><subject>Skin</subject><subject>Skin temperature</subject><subject>Thermal imaging</subject><subject>Vasodilation</subject><subject>Wound healing</subject><subject>Wrist</subject><issn>0196-8092</issn><issn>1096-9101</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2020</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp1kEtOwzAQhi0EouWx4ALIEisWLbYT2w07VJ5SSxEFsYycZFCDkkyxE6Gw4hCckJPgksKOxWhGM5_-kT5CDjgbcsbESeHKoQiEkBukz1mkBhFnfJP0GffziEWiR3ace2GMBYLpbdLzTYVKij5x0zy1mOY2bQpTo23pPbglVg5ojfRugTUmOZaYrc45Vl8fn0-Lls6xhDWZUeNrVi_AOnqO9BbrU3pG7_0Wy_wdMjrGqrZYFH6c103W7pGtZ1M42F_3XfJ4efEwvh5MZlc347PJIA3USA50qEGAFonmQggAo4xWMuUpaEhYmMoUkiBgYRSMFGQRN4ExzEhtpEyASxPskqMud2nxtQFXxy_Y2Mq_jEUY6jCKtFKeOu4o78E5C8_x0ualsW3MWbzSG3u98Y9ezx6uE5ukhOyP_PXpgZMOeMsLaP9PiifzaRf5Ddc3hkE</recordid><startdate>202011</startdate><enddate>202011</enddate><creator>Gavish, Lilach</creator><creator>Hoffer, Oshrit</creator><creator>Rabin, Neta</creator><creator>Halak, Moshe</creator><creator>Shkilevich, Simon</creator><creator>Shayovitz, Yuval</creator><creator>Weizman, Gal</creator><creator>Haim, Ortal</creator><creator>Gavish, Benjamin</creator><creator>Gertz, S. David</creator><creator>Ovadia‐Blechman, Zehava</creator><general>Wiley Subscription Services, Inc</general><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>M7Z</scope><scope>P64</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0392-8958</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>202011</creationdate><title>Microcirculatory Response to Photobiomodulation—Why Some Respond and Others Do Not: A Randomized Controlled Study</title><author>Gavish, Lilach ; Hoffer, Oshrit ; Rabin, Neta ; Halak, Moshe ; Shkilevich, Simon ; Shayovitz, Yuval ; Weizman, Gal ; Haim, Ortal ; Gavish, Benjamin ; Gertz, S. David ; Ovadia‐Blechman, Zehava</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c3685-747e2e72b71222eea6a765c1ce7eb04c5ceb33049386ed91a3aa0a57a55be15a3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2020</creationdate><topic>Blood</topic><topic>Blood flow</topic><topic>Blood volume</topic><topic>body temperature regulation</topic><topic>Capillary flow</topic><topic>Doppler effect</topic><topic>Heat detection</topic><topic>Infrared radiation</topic><topic>Irradiation</topic><topic>Lasers</topic><topic>laser‐Doppler flowmetry</topic><topic>Light therapy</topic><topic>low‐level laser therapy</topic><topic>microcirculation</topic><topic>Pain</topic><topic>Parameter modification</topic><topic>Parameter sensitivity</topic><topic>Perfusion</topic><topic>photoplethysmography</topic><topic>Skin</topic><topic>Skin temperature</topic><topic>Thermal imaging</topic><topic>Vasodilation</topic><topic>Wound healing</topic><topic>Wrist</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Gavish, Lilach</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hoffer, Oshrit</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rabin, Neta</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Halak, Moshe</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Shkilevich, Simon</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Shayovitz, Yuval</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Weizman, Gal</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Haim, Ortal</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gavish, Benjamin</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gertz, S. David</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ovadia‐Blechman, Zehava</creatorcontrib><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Biochemistry Abstracts 1</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><jtitle>Lasers in surgery and medicine</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Gavish, Lilach</au><au>Hoffer, Oshrit</au><au>Rabin, Neta</au><au>Halak, Moshe</au><au>Shkilevich, Simon</au><au>Shayovitz, Yuval</au><au>Weizman, Gal</au><au>Haim, Ortal</au><au>Gavish, Benjamin</au><au>Gertz, S. David</au><au>Ovadia‐Blechman, Zehava</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Microcirculatory Response to Photobiomodulation—Why Some Respond and Others Do Not: A Randomized Controlled Study</atitle><jtitle>Lasers in surgery and medicine</jtitle><addtitle>Lasers Surg Med</addtitle><date>2020-11</date><risdate>2020</risdate><volume>52</volume><issue>9</issue><spage>863</spage><epage>872</epage><pages>863-872</pages><issn>0196-8092</issn><eissn>1096-9101</eissn><abstract>Background and Objectives
Photobiomodulation (PBM), a non‐ionizing, non‐thermal irradiation, used clinically to accelerate wound healing and inhibit pain, was previously shown to increase blood flow. However, some individuals respond to PBM, but others do not. The purpose of this study was to investigate factors affecting this patient‐specific response using advanced, noninvasive methods for monitoring microcirculatory activity.
Study Design/Materials and Methods
In this prospective, randomized controlled clinical trial (NCT03357523), 20 healthy non‐smoking volunteers (10:10 males:females, 30 ± 8 years old) were randomized to receive either red‐ (633 nm and 70 W/cm2) or near‐infrared light (830 nm and 55 mW/cm2) over the wrist for 5 minutes. Photoplethysmography, laser Doppler flowmetry, and thermal imaging were used to monitor palm microcirculatory blood volume, blood flow, and skin temperature, respectively, before, during, and 20 minutes after irradiation. Participants with skin temperature change ≥0.5°C from baseline were considered “responders”.
Results
Near‐infrared PBM was found to induce a 27% increase in microcirculatory flow that increased to 54% during the 20‐minute follow‐up period (P = 0.049 and P = 0.004, respectively), but red light PBM did not increase the median flow. Only 10 of 20 participants were responders by thermal imaging (i.e., ≥0.5°C from baseline), and their initial skin temperature was between 33 and 37.5°C. The non‐responders had either “hot” hands (≥37.5°C) or “cold” hands (≤33°C). In responders, the meantime to 20% increase in microcirculatory blood volume and blood flow was less than 2.5 minutes after initiation of PBM irradiation.
Conclusions
We demonstrated that PBM induces arteriolar vasodilatation that results in both immediate and long‐lasting increased capillary flow and tissue perfusion in healthy individuals. This response was wavelength‐dependent and modified by skin temperature. These findings regarding physiological parameters associated with sensitivity or resistance to PBM provide information of direct relevance for patient‐specific therapy. Lasers Surg. Med. © 2020 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>Wiley Subscription Services, Inc</pub><pmid>32064652</pmid><doi>10.1002/lsm.23225</doi><tpages>10</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0392-8958</orcidid></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0196-8092 |
ispartof | Lasers in surgery and medicine, 2020-11, Vol.52 (9), p.863-872 |
issn | 0196-8092 1096-9101 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_journals_2447499766 |
source | Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete |
subjects | Blood Blood flow Blood volume body temperature regulation Capillary flow Doppler effect Heat detection Infrared radiation Irradiation Lasers laser‐Doppler flowmetry Light therapy low‐level laser therapy microcirculation Pain Parameter modification Parameter sensitivity Perfusion photoplethysmography Skin Skin temperature Thermal imaging Vasodilation Wound healing Wrist |
title | Microcirculatory Response to Photobiomodulation—Why Some Respond and Others Do Not: A Randomized Controlled Study |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-15T23%3A59%3A23IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Microcirculatory%20Response%20to%20Photobiomodulation%E2%80%94Why%20Some%20Respond%20and%20Others%20Do%20Not:%20A%20Randomized%20Controlled%20Study&rft.jtitle=Lasers%20in%20surgery%20and%20medicine&rft.au=Gavish,%20Lilach&rft.date=2020-11&rft.volume=52&rft.issue=9&rft.spage=863&rft.epage=872&rft.pages=863-872&rft.issn=0196-8092&rft.eissn=1096-9101&rft_id=info:doi/10.1002/lsm.23225&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2447499766%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2447499766&rft_id=info:pmid/32064652&rfr_iscdi=true |