Advertisement

Aesthetic Plastic Surgery

, Volume 43, Issue 1, pp 147–154 | Cite as

Photobiomodulation Improved the First Stages of Wound Healing Process After Abdominoplasty: An Experimental, Double-Blinded, Non-randomized Clinical Trial

  • Renato Matta RamosEmail author
  • Marion Burland
  • Jefferson Braga Silva
  • Lauren Marquardt Burman
  • Marco Smiderle Gelain
  • Leticia Manoel Debom
  • Jean Michel Bec
  • Mohsen Alirezai
  • Carlos Oscar Uebel
  • Jean Valmier
Original Article Body Contouring

Abstract

Background

Photobiomodulation is widely studied for its potential benefits in the wound healing process. Numerous scientific studies have highlighted its effect on various phases of wound repair, but clinical validations are few. This comparative trial aims to evaluate the influence of photobiomodulation on the post-abdominoplasty healing process.

Methods

Seventeen Caucasian women (aged 18–55) who underwent an abdominoplasty were enrolled in this double-blinded, controlled clinical trial. The postoperative scars were divided into two areas; the right side of the scars was treated with ten sessions of photobiomodulation (consisting in three types of wavelengths). The other part of the scars was used as control and did not receive any additional treatment. Clinical assessments of both parts of the scars were scheduled at 1, 6 and 12 months postoperative.

Results

Within six months following surgery, significantly improved quality of the scars on the treated side compared with the untreated side was reported by patients and experienced professionals according to Vancouver Scar Scale, Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale (p < 0.05) and standardized photographs (p < 0.05). At 1 year of follow-up, patients observed no differences between the treated and untreated sides of the scars. This suggests that photobiomodulation appears to play an early role in the wound healing process, accelerating the first stages of cicatrization.

Conclusion

This study statistically validates the positive impact of photobiomodulation treatment on the first stages of the postoperative healing process. Carried out on Caucasians participants only, this study should, however, be performed on a more heterogeneous population to definitively confirm these effects on an international population.

Clinical trial registry

Registro Brasileiro de ensaios clínicos: http://www.ensaiosclinicos.gov.br, Trial RBR-49PK78.

Level of Evidence II

This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266.

Keywords

Wound healing Photobiomodulation Phototherapy Abdominoplasty Surgical scar 

Notes

Acknowledgements

There was no funding from either public, private or third sector sources. The company Biolux Medical—France granted the LED devices, and they did not participate in the research protocol, patient’s selection or surgical procedures.

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

References

  1. 1.
    Capon A, Iarmarcovai G, Gonnelli D, Degardin N, Magalon G, Mordon S (2010) Scar prevention using Laser-Assisted Skin Healing (LASH) in plastic surgery. Aesthetic Plast Surg 34(4):438–446Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Jin R, Huang X, Li H, Yuan Y, Li B, Cheng C, Li Q (2013) Laser therapy for prevention and treatment of pathologic excessive scars. Plast Reconstr Surg 132(6):1747–1758Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Kim DH, Ryu HJ, Choi JE, Ahn HH, Kye YC, Seo SH (2014) A comparison of the scar prevention effect between carbon dioxide fractional laser and pulsed dye laser in surgical scars. Dermat Surg 40(9):973–978Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Ojea AR, Madi O, Neto RM, Lima SE, de Carvalho BT, Ojea MJ, Marcos RL, da Silva FS, Zamuner SR, Chavantes MC (2016) Beneficial effects of applying low-level laser therapy to surgical wounds after bariatric surgery. Photomed Laser Surg 34(11):580–584Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Casanova D, Alliez A, Baptista C, Gonelli D, Lemdjadi Z, Bohbot S (2017) A 1-year follow-up of post-operative scars after the use of a 1210-nm laser-assisted skin healing (LASH) technology: a randomized controlled trial. Aesthet Plast Surg 41:938–948Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    de Barros Araújo R Jr., Gonzaga ICA, Fernandes GA, Lima ACG, Cortelazzi PST, de Oliveira RA, Nicolau RA (2018) Low-intensity LED therapy (λ 640 ± 20 nm) on saphenectomy healing in patients who underwent coronary artery bypass graft: a randomized, double-blind study. Lasers Med Sci 33(1):103–109Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Karu T (2006) Primary and secondary mechanisms of action of visible to near-IR radiation on cells. J Photochem Photobiol, B 49(1):1–17Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    de Freitas LF, Hamblin MR (2017) Proposed mechanisms of photobiomodulation or low-level light therapy. IEEE J Sel Top Quantum Electron 22(3):348–364Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Elad S, Arany P, Bensadoun RJ, Epstein JB, Barasch A, Raber-Durlacher J (2018) Photobiomodulation therapy in the management of oral mucositis: search for the optimal clinical treatment parameters. Support Care Cancer 26:3319–3321Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Khan I, Arany P (2014) Biophysical approaches for oral wound healing: emphasis on photobiomodulation. Adv Wound Care (New Rochelle) 4(12):724–737Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Tacon KC, Santos HC, Parente LM, Cunha LC, Lino-Júnior Rde S, Ribeiro-Rotta RF, Tacon FS, Amaral WN (2011) Healing activity of laser InGaAlP (660 nm) in rats. Acta Cir Bras 26(5):373–378Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Komine N, Ikeda K, Tada K, Hashimoto N, Sugimoto N, Tomita K (2010) Activation of the extracellular signal-regulated kinase signal pathway by light emitting diode irradiation. Lasers Med Sci 25(4):531–537Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    de Moraes JM, de Oliveira Eterno, Mendonça D, Moura VB, Oliveira MA, Afonso CL, Vinaud MC, Bachion MM, de Souza Lino R Jr. (2013) Anti-inflammatory effect of low-intensity laser on the healing of third-degree burn wounds in rats. Lasers Med Sci 28(4):1169–1176Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Trajano ET, da Trajano LA, Dos Santos Silva MA, Venter NG, de Porto LC, de Fonseca A, Monte-Alto-Costa A (2015) Low-level red laser improves healing of second-degree burn when applied during proliferative phase. Lasers Med Sci 30(4):1297–1304Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    de Medeiros ML, Araújo-Filho I, da Silva EM, de Sousa Queiroz WS, Soares CD, de Carvalho MG, Maciel MA (2017) Effect of low-level laser therapy on angiogenesis and matrix metalloproteinase-2 immunoexpression in wound repair. Lasers Med Sci 32(1):35–43Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Chaves ME, Araújo AR, Piancastelli AC, Pinotti M (2014) Effects of low-power light therapy on wound healing: LASER × LED. An Bras Dermatol 89(4):616–623Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Spitler R, Berns MW (2014) Comparison of laser and diode sources for acceleration of in vitro wound healing by low-levellight therapy. J Biomed Opt 19(3):38001Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Burland M, Paris L, Quintana P, Bec JM, Diouloufet L, Sar C, Boukhaddaoui H, Charlot B, Braga Silva J, Chammas M, Sieso V, Valmier J, Bardin F (2015) Neurite growth acceleration of adult dorsal root ganglion neurons illuminated by low-level light emitting diode light at 645 nm. J Biophotonics 8(6):480–488Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Truong PT, Lee JC, Soer B, Gaul CA, Olivotto IA (2007) Reliability and validity testing of the patient and observer scar assessment scale in evaluating linear scars after breast cancer surgery. Plast Reconstr Surg 119(2):487–494Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Martins P, Uebel C, Machado D, Braga Silva J (2011) Uso de células-tronco adultas de tecido adiposo na cicatrização da pele: estudo controlado, randomizado. Rev Bras Cir Plást 26(3):394–401Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Winocour J, Gupta V, Ramirez JR, Shack RB, Grotting JC, Higdon KK (2015) Abdominoplasty: risk factors, complication rates, and safety of combined procedure. Plast Reconstr Surg 136(5):597e–606eGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Vercelli S, Ferriero G, Sartorio F, Stissi V, Franchignoni F (2009) How to assess postsurgical scars: a review of outcome measures. Disabil Rehabil 31(25):2055–2063Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Nguyen TA, Feldstein SI, Shumaker PR, Krakowski AC (2015) A review of scar assessment scales. Semin Cutan Med Surg 34(1):28–36Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Bae SH, Bae YC (2014) Analysis of frequency of use of different scar assessment scales based on the scar condition and treatment method. Arch Plast Surg 41(2):111–115Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Bianchi FA, Roccia F, Fiorini P, Berrone S (2010) Use of patient and observer scar assessment scale for evaluation of facial scars treated with self-drying silicone gel. J Craniofac Surg 21(3):719–723Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Fleisher J, Khalifeh A, Pettker C, Berghella V, Dabbish N, Mackeen AD (2018) Patient satisfaction and cosmetic outcome in a randomized study of cesarean skin closure. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med 24:1–6Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Matiasek J, Kienzl P, Unger LW, Grill C, Koller R, Turk BR (2018) An intra-individual surgical wound comparison shows that octenidine-based hydrogel wound dressing ameliorates scar appearance following abdominoplasty. Int Wound J 15:1–7Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature and International Society of Aesthetic Plastic Surgery 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Renato Matta Ramos
    • 1
    • 8
    Email author
  • Marion Burland
    • 2
    • 3
  • Jefferson Braga Silva
    • 4
    • 5
  • Lauren Marquardt Burman
    • 1
  • Marco Smiderle Gelain
    • 6
  • Leticia Manoel Debom
    • 1
  • Jean Michel Bec
    • 2
  • Mohsen Alirezai
    • 7
  • Carlos Oscar Uebel
    • 1
  • Jean Valmier
    • 3
    • 7
  1. 1.Plastic Surgery Division of São Lucas Hospital of PontificiaUniversidade Católica do Rio Grande do SulPorto AlegreBrazil
  2. 2.Biolux InstitutePalavas Les Flots, MontpellierFrance
  3. 3.Inserm U1051University of MontpellierMontpellierFrance
  4. 4.Hand and Reconstructive Microsurgery Division of São Lucas Hospital of PontificiaUniversidade Católica do Rio Grande do SulPorto AlegreBrazil
  5. 5.School of MedicinePUCRS UniversityMontpellierFrance
  6. 6.Universidade Federal de Ciências da Saúde de Porto AlegreSan Isidro, LimaPeru
  7. 7.Inserm U1051., INM, Hôpital St EloiUniversity Hospital Center of MontpellierMontpellier Cedex 5France
  8. 8.Bliss Plastic SurgeryPrivate ClinicSan Isidro LimaPeru

Personalised recommendations