ArticleAesthetic surgery journal. Open forum2025
The Use of a Proprietary Near-Infrared Laser to Enhance Wound Healing: A Preliminary Preclinical and Clinical Study.
Article in Aesthetic surgery journal. Open forum, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Nonthermal light energy has been used to enhance wound healing. This is known as photobiomodulation. Although preclinical evidence is largely based on laser light, light-emitting diodes (LEDs) form the mainstay of clinical studies owing to the lack of available lasers for nonclinical use. However, it is speculated the 2 technologies exhibit dissimilar biological responses. Objectives: The influence of a new, commercially available near-infrared laser device on the gene expression profile of human skin relative to an equivalent, near-infrared LED device was evaluated. Additionally, the wound healing potential of the device was examined in practice. Methods: Defatted human skin was exposed to the laser (3), LED (3), or negative control (3) for 5 days. On Day 6, skin samples were biopsied for ribonucleic acid extraction and gene expression assays run for 107 genes of interest. Twenty patients with chronic wounds were randomized to receive standard wound care ± laser therapy 3 times weekly for 4 weeks, and wounds were analyzed for healing. Results: The laser altered expression of 45 genes. Highly up-regulated genes (>5-fold change) included those implicated in wound healing and antiaging, whereas highly down-regulated genes included those implicated in inflammation and extracellular matrix integrity. The LED device altered expression of only 1 gene relative to negative controls. The laser reduced mean wound area by 78% and healed 4 of 10 wounds completely. In contrast, 8 of 10 of those receiving standard care exhibited no change. Conclusions: A proprietary near-infrared laser exhibited superior ability to influence gene expression in healthy skin than an equivalent LED device and induced the healing of chronic wounds. Level of Evidence 2 Therapeutic:
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.