ArticleVeterinary dermatology2026
Effect of Fluorescence Photobiomodulation on Canine Progenitor Epidermal Keratinocytes With and Without Staphylococcus pseudintermedius Colonisation.
Article in Veterinary dermatology, 2026. 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
Abstract
backgroundFluorescence photobiomodulation (FPB) is a treatment for canine dermatitis, yet no studies exist assessing its effect on canine keratinocytes in vitro.
objectivesTo determine: (i) the anti-inflammatory and antimicrobial effect of FPB on canine progenitor epidermal keratinocytes (CPEK) with and without colonisation by Staphylococcus pseudintermedius (SP); (ii) changes in CPEK viability following FPB exposure; and (iii) SP colony count following FPB exposure. MATERIALS AND
methodsKeratinocytes were grown in chamber slides, with and without SP, and treated with two, 2 min exposures to FPB. Supernatant was collected at 0, 1, 6, and 24 h post-FPB to evaluate cytokines (interleukin [IL]-2, IL-6, IL-7, IL-8, IL-10, IL-15, IL-18, interferon-γ induced protein 10 [IP-10], tumour necrosis factor-α, interferon-γ, keratinocyte chemotactic-like, granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor, and monocyte chemoattractant protein-1), and host defence peptides (β-defensin 3-like and cathelicidin) secretion. Cell cytotoxicity was assessed via lactate dehydrogenase and adenosine triphosphate assays. The supernatant pellet was collected at 0 and 24 h, resuspended, and plated. Bacterial colonies were counted after 24 h of incubation. Experiments were performed in duplicate and repeated five times.
resultsAt 6 h post-FPB, IP-10 fluorescence intensity was mildly yet significantly decreased in CPEK+SP (p = 0.04). No other statistically significant differences were found for cytokine, β-defensin, cathelicidin, or SP colony counts. A lack of cytotoxicity was observed post-FPB over a 24 h period. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Fluorescence photobiomodulation may have a mild anti-inflammatory effect on CPEKs colonised by SP in vitro based on the significant decrease in IP-10 production 6 h post-FBP exposure, yet does not affect CPEK cell viability.
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.