ArticleVeterinary world2020
Penetration depth study of 830 nm low-intensity laser therapy on living dog tissue.
Article in Veterinary world, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- Assessing the potential efficacy of 830-nanometer low-level laser therapy in cats: Extraoral applications.Veterinary world · 2024Article
- A Systematic Literature Review of Complementary and Alternative Veterinary Medicine: Laser Therapy.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2023Review
- Photobiomodulation in 3D tissue engineering.Journal of biomedical optics · 2022Article
- Proposed Canadian Consensus Guidelines on Osteoarthritis Treatment Based on OA-COAST Stages 1-4.Frontiers in veterinary science · 2022Review
- Assessment of wound area reduction on chronic wounds in dogs with photobiomodulation therapy: A randomized controlled clinical trial.Veterinary world · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
aimRecent studies have shown that low-intensity laser therapy (LILT) enhances chronic wound healing, reduces pain, reduces inflammation, and improves post-operative rehabilitation. However, clinical outcomes in the veterinary use of LILT vary between different experimental studies. This is explained by improper laser parameter settings and limits of its penetration depth. This study aimed to investigate the penetration depth of 830 nm LILT on living dog tissue in different operating modes. This entailed continuous wave (CW) versus pulse wave (PW) and with contact versus non-contact techniques of the laser probe at different tissue-laser probe distances. The results can be applied for use in clinical practice. MATERIALS AND
methodsTwenty-four dogs that had undergone abdominal surgery were included in this study. The laser parameters were set at 200 mW, fluence of 4 J/cm
resultsThe MOP of the 830 nm CW laser was significantly higher than the PW laser (p<0.05). The MOP of the contact technique was significantly greater than that of the non-contact technique in both CW and PW modes (p<0.05). The MOP through the skin tissue was between 16.09 and 18.60 mW (8.05-9.30%) for the contact technique and 8.73 and 19.36 mW (4.37-9.68%) for the non-contact technique. In the muscle-skin layer, the MOP was between 0.50 and 1.56 mW (0.25-0.78%) and the MOP was not detected using the non-contact technique with a 5 cm tissue-laser probe distance.
conclusionOur study indicates that 830 nm LILT (with laser parameter setting at 200 mW, fluence of 4 J/cm
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.