Trial reportLasers in medical science2025
Photobiomodulation therapy for enhanced wound and Scar healing: visual and statistical evaluation.
Trial report in Lasers in medical science, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Plant Exosome Injection with or without Low Level Laser Therapy Promotes Skin Wound Healing: An Experimental Study.Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of Photobiomodulation Therapy (PBMT), formerly referred to as Low-level laser therapy (LLLT), in promoting enhanced wound and scar healing, and to optimize treatment parameters for various scar types. Sixty participants were assigned to three groups based on the type and duration of their scars. Group A (recent scars < 6 months) received between 3 and 8 PBMT sessions, while those with recent surgical scars received up to 15 sessions. Group B (old scars > 1 year) received 12 to 15 sessions, and Group C (acne scars) received 8 to 10 sessions. All treatments used a continuous red diode laser at 660 nm with a power density of 15.6 mW/cm². For old and surgical scars, each treatment area was irradiated for 6 min, delivering a dose of 5.6 J/cm². For recent and acne scars, exposure time was 4 min with a dose of 3.7 J/cm². Sessions were conducted two to three times per week, depending on group allocation. Statistical analysis showed significant improvements in scar color, size, and patient satisfaction across all groups (p < 0.01). Recent scars responded most favorably in terms of appearance and contour. No adverse effects or complications were reported during the study. This study confirms the efficacy and safety of PBM using 660 nm diode lasers for scar management. The findings provide evidence-based guidelines on dosage and the number of sessions needed for optimal clinical results.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40802060What 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.