SynthesisLasers in medical science2026
Clinical dosimetry and efficacy of LED photobiomodulation for chronic lower-limb wound healing: a systematic review of randomized trials.
Synthesis 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.
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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Chronic lower-limb wounds represent a major clinical and socioeconomic burden due to delayed healing and high recurrence rates. Light-emitting diode (LED) photobiomodulation has been proposed as a noninvasive and low-cost adjunctive therapy; however, clinical evidence remains inconsistent. This systematic review aimed to synthesize evidence from randomized clinical trials investigating the efficacy of LED photobiomodulation for chronic lower-limb wound healing and to identify irradiation parameters associated with improved outcomes. A comprehensive search was conducted in PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Embase up to May 2026. Six randomized clinical trials met the inclusion criteria. Wavelengths ranged from 620 to 950 nm, and energy densities varied between 2.4 and 126 J/cm². The findings suggest that LED photobiomodulation may promote wound area reduction, improve wound bed quality, and increase microcirculation, particularly in diabetic foot ulcers. However, one study using a high energy density (126 J/cm²) did not demonstrate beneficial effects, suggesting a possible dose-dependent response. The overall certainty of the evidence, assessed using the GRADE approach, was classified as very low due to inconsistency and indirectness among the included studies. Although LED photobiomodulation appears to be safe and demonstrates therapeutic potential, substantial heterogeneity in irradiation parameters, small sample sizes, and methodological limitations preclude definitive conclusions regarding its clinical efficacy. Well-designed randomized controlled trials with standardized protocols and dose-response investigations are needed to establish optimal therapeutic parameters and confirm clinical efficacy.
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.