ArticleLasers in medical science2024
Analysis of modified ilib therapy in patients submitted to plastic surgery.
Article in Lasers in medical science, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effect of modified intravascular laser irradiation of blood in the oral and systemic conditions during dental treatment-A systematic review.Lasers in medical science · 2024Pooled it
- Effects of ILIB on anxiety and physiological parameters during third molar surgery: a pilot randomized trial.Lasers in medical science · 2025Trial
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 6 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The sample comprised 44 volunteers who had undergone some surgical procedure and were equally divided into four groups. G1 started the therapy 24 h after the surgical procedure with the device off. G2 followed the same time pattern, 24 h, but with the device turned on. G3 and G4 started therapy three days after the surgical procedure; in G3, the device was turned off, and in G4, the device remained on during therapy; each session lasted 30 min, using 660 nm (red), energy 180 J. For all groups, the therapy started with daily use for seven days and followed the interval use of three times a week until completed 21 days. The revaluation was performed after 7 and 21 days. The results found show changes in HR at rest, systolic and diastolic BP, and in peripheral oxygen saturation, which showed a significant difference in the groups that used on-therapy (p < 0.05). In the MCGILL Scale evaluation, the mean total score showed a more accentuated drop in the groups that used ILIB, (p < 0.05). ILIB may have prevented a more significant evolution of firosis levels; however, no changes were observed in the evaluation of sleep and anxiety. The application of the ILIB in patients undergoing plastic surgery was supported in terms of hemodynamics and pain; in addition, starting the ILIB application 24 h after the procedure proved to be more advantageous.
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.