RESUMO
OBJECTIVE: Our objective was to review the first 20 years of photobiomodulation (PBM) clinical studies for oral mucositis (OM) mitigation. STUDY DESIGN: A scoping review screened controlled clinical studies. The PBM devices, protocols, and clinical outcomes were analyzed. RESULTS: Seventy-five studies met the inclusion criteria. The first study dated from 1992, and the term "PBM" was first published in 2017. Public services, placebo-controlled randomized trials, and patients with head and neck chemoradiation were predominant among included studies. Prophylactic red intraoral laser protocols were mostly used. Comparing the outcomes of all protocols was unfeasible due to missing treatment parameters and nonhomogeneous measurements. CONCLUSIONS: The main barrier to optimizing clinical protocols of PBM for OM was the lack of standardization in clinical studies. Although PBM use is now globally present in oncology settings and generally marked by good outcomes reported, additional randomized clinical trials with well-described methods are necessary.
Assuntos
Terapia com Luz de Baixa Intensidade , Estomatite , Humanos , Terapia com Luz de Baixa Intensidade/métodos , Estomatite/radioterapia , Estomatite/prevenção & controle , Quimiorradioterapia , LuzRESUMO
OBJECTIVE: This systematic review investigated the dosimetric parameters used in preclinical studies. STUDY DESIGN: Searches were performed in 3 databases (PubMed, Scopus, and Embase) and gray literature to identify studies for review. In vitro and ex vivo studies that examined the effect of radiation on human permanent teeth were included. The modified Consolidated Standards Of Reporting Trials checklist of items for reporting preclinical in vitro studies was used to assess the risk of bias. RESULTS: In total, 32 studies met the inclusion criteria. The average radiation dose of in vitro studies was 53 (±22) Gy and in ex vivo studies was 69 (±1) Gy. Twenty-two studies used 5 different fractionation schemes. Twenty-two of the included studies did not report the radiotherapy modality of those reporting. Twenty studies used linear accelerators, and 7 used Cobalt-60 with the source-surface-distance of radiation ranging from 1.5 to 100 cm. Distilled water was the storage solution for the dental structure used most commonly. Biases were observed, including small sample sizes, lack of randomization, and blinding processes. CONCLUSION: The dosimetric parameters used in the preclinical studies, including radiation dose, radiotherapy modality, fractionation regime, and the storage solutions used did not support the hypothesis of direct effects of radiation on the dental structure.
Assuntos
Lista de Checagem , Dentição , HumanosRESUMO
Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) caused by SARS-CoV-2 virus was first recognized in late 2019 and remains a significant threat. We therefore assessed the use of local methylene blue photodynamic viral inactivation (MB-PDI) in the oral and nasal cavities, in combination with the systemic anti-viral, anti-inflammatory and antioxidant actions of orally ingested methylene blue (MB) and photobiomodulation (PBM) for COVID-19 disease. The proposed protocol leverages the separate and combined effects of MB and 660nm red light emitted diode (LED) to comprehensively address the pathophysiological sequelae of COVID-19. A total of eight pilot subjects with COVID-19 disease were treated in the Bahamas over the period June 2021-August 2021, using a remote care program that was developed for this purpose. Although not a pre-requisite for inclusion, none of the subjects had received any COVID-19 vaccination prior to commencing the study. Clinical outcome assessment tools included serial cycle threshold measurements as a surrogate estimate of viral load; serial online questionnaires to document symptom response and adverse effects; and a one-year follow-up survey to assess long-term outcomes. All subjects received MB-PDI to target the main sites of viral entry in the nose and mouth. This was the central component of the treatment protocol with the addition of orally ingested MB and/or PBM based on clinical requirements. The mucosal surfaces were irradiated with 660 nm LED in a continuous emission mode at energy density of 49 J/cm2 for PDI and 4.9 J/cm2 for PBM. Although our pilot subjects had significant co-morbidities, extremely high viral loads and moderately severe symptoms during the Delta phase of the pandemic, the response to treatment was highly encouraging. Rapid reductions in viral loads were observed and negative PCR tests were documented within a median of 4 days. These laboratory findings occurred in parallel with significant clinical improvement, mostly within 12-24 h of commencing the treatment protocol. There were no significant adverse effects and none of the subjects who completed the protocol required in-patient hospitalization. The outcomes were similarly encouraging at one-year follow-up with virtual absence of "long COVID" symptoms or of COVID-19 re-infection. Our results indicate that the protocols may be a safe and promising approach to challenging COVID-19 disease. Moreover, due its broad spectrum of activity, this approach has the potential to address the prevailing and future COVID-19 variants and other infections transmitted via the upper respiratory tract. Extensive studies with a large cohort are warranted to validate our results.
RESUMO
Mucositis is one of the more frequent and costly adverse events following cancer treatment. To evaluate and report the direct economic outcomes associated with the management of mucositis across several cancer treatments we conducted a systematic review according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement. Scopus, MEDLINE/PubMed, and Embase were searched electronically and a total of 37 relevant studies were included. The costs attributable to mucositis in the hematopoietic stem cell transplantation setting ranged from 1124,47 US dollars (USD) to 299 214,14 USD per patient. The radiotherapy/chemoradiotherapy/radiotherapy plus molecular targeted therapy accounted for mucositis costs that ranged from 51,23 USD to 33 560,58 USD per patient. Costs for mucositis in the chemotherapy setting ranged from 4,18 USD to 31 963,64 USD per patient. When the cancer treatment was not specified, costs of mucositis ranged from 565,85 USD to as high as 20 279, 12 USD per patient. Mucositis costs from multimodal therapy ranged from 12,42 USD to 5670,46 USD per patient. The molecular targeted therapy setting included only one study and depending on the healthcare providers' perspective of each country evaluated, mucositis' costs ranged from 45,78 USD to 3484,91 USD per patient. Mucositis is associated with increased resource use, consultations, hospitalizations and extended hospitalizations, leading to a substantial incremental cost that exacerbates the economic burden on the patient, health plan and health system across several cancer treatments and diagnosis. More studies with a prospective evaluation of the economic costs associated with mucositis management are needed.