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...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Lasers in surgery and medicine 2020-11, Vol.52 (9), p.863-872
Hauptverfasser: Gavish, Lilach, Hoffer, Oshrit, Rabin, Neta, Halak, Moshe, Shkilevich, Simon, Shayovitz, Yuval, Weizman, Gal, Haim, Ortal, Gavish, Benjamin, Gertz, S. David, Ovadia‐Blechman, Zehava
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 &amp; 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