High-intensity light therapy for post-interventional complications and pain after minimally invasive spinal procedures: a case series.

Lance Lorenzo Babcock, Billy K Huh, Saba Javed

Abstract read

In one paragraph

Article in Lasers in medical science, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it

0cells of the map it votes in

0citing papers in PubMed

–field-weighted citation impact

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

3 authors.

Lance Lorenzo BabcockMcGovern Medical School, The University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston, Houston, TX, USA. lance.l.babcock@uth.tmc.edu.

Billy K HuhDepartment of Pain Medicine, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA.

Saba JavedDepartment of Pain Medicine, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA. SJaved@mdanderson.org.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1028-8904

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

High Intensity Laser Therapy (HILT) has improved postoperative outcomes by promoting faster recovery and analgesia. However, there is little evidence of its effectiveness in the context of recovery after minimally invasive spinal procedures. This case series analyzes the postoperative outcomes after minimally invasive spinal surgery by measuring pain, complications, and tissue oxygenation. Two cohorts of 16 patients, who were spinal surgery outpatients at MD Anderson Cancer Center, were separated into a HILT group and a control (no HILT) group. In the HILT group, pain levels and tissue oxygenation were assessed before and after each of two HILT sessions. The postoperative complications for each group were compared at each of the two follow-up visits. Tissue oxygenation levels were significantly higher after each HILT application at each visit, and pain was significantly reduced after each HILT application compared to before treatment. There was no significant difference observed in the postoperative complications between the control group and the HILT group. These results suggest that the use of HILT in the minimally invasive spinal intervention postoperative setting improves patient outcomes.

Indexed as

Laser TherapyMinimally Invasive Surgical ProceduresPostoperative ComplicationsPostoperative PainAdultAgedFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedTreatment OutcomeCase seriesHigh intensity laser therapyMinimally invasive spinal interventionPain management

Identifiers

PMID41706322

DOI10.1007/s10103-026-04815-6

PMCPMC12916963

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata

LicenceCC BY

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.