RESUMO
OBJETIVO: Identificar na literatura científica a aplicação da laserterapia de baixa intensidade no tratamento de traumas mamilares em puérperas. MÉTODO: Trata-se de uma revisão integrativa da literatura. O levantamento das publicações ocorreu no período de setembro a novembro de 2020, utilizando os descritores "low-level light therapy" e "laser therapy", além da palavra-chave: "nipple trauma", nas bases de dados da PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, Scopuse Web of Science.Após a leitura e análise dos artigos, 3 artigos foram selecionados para a amostra final. RESULTADOS: Os dados analisados compuseram dois eixos temáticos denominados: "Uso da laserterapia no alívio da dor mamilar" e "Uso da laserterapia na cicatrização de fissuras mamilares". CONCLUSÃO: A aplicação da laserterapia resultou na diminuição da dor e boa regeneração tecidual mamilar, contribuindo para manutenção do aleitamento materno.
OBJECTIVE: To identify in the scientific literature the application of low-level laser therapy in the treatment of nipple traumas in puerperal women. METHOD: This is an integrative literature review.The survey of publications took place from September to November2020, using the descriptors "low-level light therapy" and "laser therapy", in addition to the keyword"nipple trauma", in the PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, Scopus and Web of Science databases.After reading and analyzing the articles, 3 were selected for the finalsample. RESULTS: The analyzed data composed two thematic axes, namely: "The use of laser therapy for nipple pain relief" and "The use of laser therapy in the healing of nipple fissures". CONCLUSION: The application of laser therapy resulted in pain reduction and in good nipple tissue regeneration, contributing to the maintenance of breastfeeding.
OBJETIVO: Identificar en la literatura científica la aplicación de laserterapia de baja intensidad en el tratamiento del traumatismo del pezón en mujeres posparto. MÉTODO: Se trata de una revisión integradora de la literatura. El levantamiento de publicaciones se realizó de septiembre a noviembre de 2020, utilizando los descriptores "low-level light therapy" y "laser therapy", además de la palabra clave: "nipple trauma", en las bases de datos de PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, Scopus y Web of Science. Después de leer y analizar los artículos, se seleccionaron 3 artículos para la muestra final. RESULTADOS: Los datos analizados comprendieron dos ejes temáticos denominados: "Uso de laserterapia para aliviar el dolor del pezón" y "Uso de laserterapia para la cicatrización de las grietas del pezón". CONCLUSIÓN: La aplicación de laserterapia dio como resultado una disminución del dolor y una buena regeneración del tejido del pezón, contribuyendo al mantenimiento de la lactancia.
Assuntos
Humanos , Feminino , Doenças Mamárias/radioterapia , Aleitamento Materno/efeitos adversos , Terapia com Luz de Baixa Intensidade , Período Pós-Parto , Mamilos/lesões , Cicatrização/efeitos da radiação , Doenças Mamárias/etiologia , Mastodinia/radioterapiaRESUMO
AIM: To provide an overview on the available treatments to prevent and reduce gynecomastia and/or breast pain caused by antiandrogen therapy for prostate cancer. METHODS: The German Society of Radiation Oncology (DEGRO) expert panel summarized available evidence published and assessed the validity of the information on efficacy and treatment-related toxicity. RESULTS: Eight randomized controlled trials and one meta-analysis were identified. Two randomized trials demonstrated that prophylactic radiation therapy (RT) using 1â¯× 10â¯Gy or 2â¯× 6â¯Gy significantly reduced the rate of gynecomastia but not breast pain, as compared to observation. A randomized dose-finding trial identified the daily dose of 20â¯mg tamoxifen (TMX) as the most effective prophylactic dose and another randomized trial described that daily TMX use was superior to weekly use. Another randomized trial showed that prophylactic daily TMX is more effective than TMX given at the onset of gynecomastia. Two other randomized trials described that TMX was clearly superior to anastrozole in reducing the risk for gynecomastia and/or breast pain. One comparative randomized trial between prophylactic RT using 1â¯× 12â¯Gy and TMX concluded that prophylactic TMX is more effective compared to prophylactic RT and furthermore that TMX appears to be more effective to treat gynecomastia and/or breast pain when symptoms are already present. A meta-analysis confirmed that both prophylactic RT and TMX can reduce the risk of gynecomastia and/or breast pain with TMX being more effective; however, the rate of side effects after TMX including dizziness and hot flushes might be higher than after RT and must be taken into account. Less is known regarding the comparative effectiveness of different radiation fractionation schedules and more modern RT techniques. CONCLUSIONS: Prophylactic RT as well as daily TMX can significantly reduce the incidence of gynecomastia and/or breast pain. TMX appears to be an effective alternative to RT also as a therapeutic treatment in the presence of gynecomastia but its side effects and off-label use must be considered.
