Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29603108›Full record

SynthesisLasers in medical science2018

Should open excisions and sutured incisions be treated differently? A review and meta-analysis of animal wound models following low-level laser therapy.

Peter Gál, Martin Bjørn Stausholm, Ivan Kováč, Erik Dosedla, Ján Luczy, František Sabol, Jan Magnus Bjordal

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Lasers in medical science, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 22% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020
    Article
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.

Peter GálDepartment of Biomedical Research, East-Slovak Institute of Cardiovascular Diseases, Inc., Ondavská 8, 040 11, Košice, Slovak Republic. galovci@yahoo.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3398-3408
Martin Bjørn StausholmPhysiotherapy Research Group, Department of Global Public Health and Primary Care, University of Bergen, Kalfarveien 31, 5018, Bergen, Norway.
Ivan KováčDepartment of Biomedical Research, East-Slovak Institute of Cardiovascular Diseases, Inc., Ondavská 8, 040 11, Košice, Slovak Republic.
Erik DosedlaDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, 1st Private Hospital Kosice-Šaca and Pavol Jozef Šafárik University, Košice-Šaca, Slovak Republic.
Ján LuczyDepartment of Heart Surgery, East-Slovak Institute of Cardiovascular Diseases, Inc. and Pavol Jozef Šafárik University, Košice, Slovak Republic.
František SabolDepartment of Heart Surgery, East-Slovak Institute of Cardiovascular Diseases, Inc. and Pavol Jozef Šafárik University, Košice, Slovak Republic.
Jan Magnus BjordalPhysiotherapy Research Group, Department of Global Public Health and Primary Care, University of Bergen, Kalfarveien 31, 5018, Bergen, Norway. jan.bjordal@uib.no.
University of Pavol Jozef Šafárik · SKFrederiksberg Hospital · DKUniversity of Bergen · NO

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Although low-level laser therapy (LLLT) was discovered already in the 1960s of the twentieth century, it took almost 40 years to be widely used in clinical dermatology/surgery. It has been demonstrated that LLLT is able to increase collagen production/wound stiffness and/or improve wound contraction. In this review, we investigated whether open and sutured wounds should be treated with different LLLT parameters. A PubMed search was performed to identify controlled studies with LLLT applied to wounded animals (sutured incisions-tensile strength measurement and open excisions-area measurement). Final score random effects meta-analyses were conducted. Nineteen studies were included. The overall result of the tensile strength analysis (eight studies) was significantly in favor of LLLT (SMD = 1.06, 95% CI 0.66-1.46), and better results were seen with 30-79 mW/cm

Indexed as

SuturesAnimalsDiabetes MellitusDisease Models, AnimalLow-Level Light TherapySurgical WoundTensile StrengthWound HealingWounds and InjuriesLow-level laser therapyPower densityRegenerationSkin woundTissue repair

Identifiers

PMID29603108
OpenAlexW2794951666

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.