Photobiomodulation in Burn Wounds: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Clinical and Preclinical Studies
Photobiomodulation, Photomedicine, and Laser Surgery, ISSN: 2578-5478, Vol: 43, Issue: 1, Page: 8-23
2025
- 1Captures
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Captures1
- Readers1
Review Description
Objective: This systematic review and meta-analysis main goal was to evaluate the efficacy of photobiomodulation as burn wounds treatment. Methods: Systematic review of literature available in databases such as PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences Literature (LILACS), and The Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) and gray literature in Google Scholar, Livivi, and Open Gray. SYRCLE’s RoB tool was applied to determine methodological quality and risk of bias, and meta-analysis was performed using the software Review Manager. Results: Fifty-one studies, gathering more than three thousand animals were included in this systematic review, and four studies were selected to the meta-analysis due to their suitability. The results indicated that photobiomodulation was not effective to improve, statistical significantly, wound retraction (SMD = −0.22; 95% CI = −4.19, 3.75; p = 0.91; I = 92%) or collagen deposition (SMD = −0.02; 95% CI = −2.17, 2.13; p = 0.99; I = 78%). Conclusion: This meta-analysis suggests that photobiomodulation, applied in burn wounds, accordingly to the protocols presented by the selected studies, was not effective over analyzed outcomes. However, this conclusion could be further discussed and verified in more homogeneous animal models and human clinical trials.
Bibliographic Details
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know