Photobiomodulation: Implications for Anesthesia and Pain Relief.

OBJECTIVE: This review examines the evidence of neural inhibition as a mechanism underlying pain relief and anesthetic effect of photobiomodulation (PBM). BACKGROUND: PBM for pain relief has also been used for more than 30 years; however, the mechanism of its effectiveness has not been well understood. METHODS: We review electrophysiological studies in humans and animal models and cell culture studies to examine neural responses to PBM. RESULTS: Evidence shows that PBM can inhibit nerve function in vivo, in situ, ex vivo, and in culture. Animal studies using noxious stimuli indicate nociceptor-specific inhibition with other studies providing direct evidence of local conduction block, leading to inhibited translation of pain centrally. Evidence of PBM-disrupted neuronal physiology affecting axonal flow, cytoskeleton organization, and decreased ATP is also presented. PBM changes are reversible with no side effects or nerve damage. CONCLUSIONS: This review provides strong evidence in neuroscience identifying inhibition of neural function as a mechanism for the clinical application of PBM in pain and anesthesia.

Neuroprotective Effects Against POCD by Photobiomodulation: Evidence from Assembly/Disassembly of the Cytoskeleton.

Postoperative cognitive dysfunction (POCD) is a decline in memory following anaesthesia and surgery in elderly patients. While often reversible, it consumes medical resources, compromises patient well-being, and possibly accelerates progression into Alzheimer's disease. Anesthetics have been implicated in POCD, as has neuroinflammation, as indicated by cytokine inflammatory markers. Photobiomodulation (PBM) is an effective treatment for a number of conditions, including inflammation. PBM also has a direct effect on microtubule disassembly in neurons with the formation of small, reversible varicosities, which cause neural blockade and alleviation of pain symptoms. This mimics endogenously formed varicosities that are neuroprotective against damage, toxins, and the formation of larger, destructive varicosities and focal swellings. It is proposed that PBM may be effective as a preconditioning treatment against POCD; similar to the PBM treatment, protective and abscopal effects that have been demonstrated in experimental models of macular degeneration, neurological, and cardiac conditions.

The Use of Low Level Laser Therapy (LLLT) For Musculoskeletal Pain.

Pain is the most common reason for physician consultation in the United States. One out of three Americans is affected by chronic pain annually. The number one reason for missed work or school days is musculoskeletal pain. Currently accepted therapies consist of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, steroid injections, opiate pain medications and surgery, each of which carries their own specific risk profiles. What is needed are effective treatments for pain which have an acceptably low risk-profile. For over forty years, low level laser (light) therapy (LLLT) and LED (light emitting diode) therapy (also known as photobiomodulation) has been shown to reduce inflammation and edema, induce analgesia, and promote healing in a range of musculoskeletal pathologies. The purpose of this paper is to review the use of LLLT for pain, the biochemical mechanisms of action, the dose response curves, and how LLLT may be employed by orthopedic surgeons to improve outcomes and reduce adverse events. With the predicted epidemic of chronic pain in developed countries, it is imperative to validate cost-effective and safe techniques for managing painful conditions which would allow people to live active and productive lives. Moreover the acceptance of LLLT (which is currently being used by many specialties around the world) into the armamentarium of the American health care provider would allow for additional treatment options for patients. A new cost-effective therapy for pain could elevate quality of life while reducing financial strains.

Efficacy of low-level laser therapy in the management of neck pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised placebo or active-treatment controlled trials.

BACKGROUND: Neck pain is a common and costly condition for which pharmacological management has limited evidence of efficacy and side-effects. Low-level laser therapy (LLLT) is a relatively uncommon, non-invasive treatment for neck pain, in which non-thermal laser irradiation is applied to sites of pain. We did a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials to assess the efficacy of LLLT in neck pain. METHODS: We searched computerised databases comparing efficacy of LLLT using any wavelength with placebo or with active control in acute or chronic neck pain. Effect size for the primary outcome, pain intensity, was defined as a pooled estimate of mean difference in change in mm on 100 mm visual analogue scale. FINDINGS: We identified 16 randomised controlled trials including a total of 820 patients. In acute neck pain, results of two trials showed a relative risk (RR) of 1.69 (95% CI 1.22-2.33) for pain improvement of LLLT versus placebo. Five trials of chronic neck pain reporting categorical data showed an RR for pain improvement of 4.05 (2.74-5.98) of LLLT. Patients in 11 trials reporting changes in visual analogue scale had pain intensity reduced by 19.86 mm (10.04-29.68). Seven trials provided follow-up data for 1-22 weeks after completion of treatment, with short-term pain relief persisting in the medium term with a reduction of 22.07 mm (17.42-26.72). Side-effects from LLLT were mild and not different from those of placebo. INTERPRETATION: We show that LLLT reduces pain immediately after treatment in acute neck pain and up to 22 weeks after completion of treatment in patients with chronic neck pain. FUNDING: None.

830 nm laser irradiation induces varicosity formation, reduces mitochondrial membrane potential and blocks fast axonal flow in small and medium diameter rat dorsal root ganglion neurons: implications for the analgesic effects of 830 nm laser.

We report the formation of 830 nm (cw) laser-induced, reversible axonal varicosities, using immunostaining with beta-tubulin, in small and medium diameter, TRPV-1 positive, cultured rat DRG neurons. Laser also induced a progressive and statistically significant decrease (p<0.005) in MMP in mitochondria in and between static axonal varicosities. In cell bodies of the neuron, the decrease in MMP was also statistically significant (p<0.05), but the decrease occurred more slowly. Importantly we also report for the first time that 830 nm (cw) laser blocked fast axonal flow, imaged in real time using confocal laser microscopy and JC-1 as mitotracker. Control neurons in parallel cultures remained unaffected with no varicosity formation and no change in MMP. Mitochondrial movement was continuous and measured along the axons at a rate of 0.8 microm/s (range 0.5-2 microm/s), consistent with fast axonal flow. Photoacceptors in the mitochondrial membrane absorb laser and mediate the transduction of laser energy into electrochemical changes, initiating a secondary cascade of intracellular events. In neurons, this results in a decrease in MMP with a concurrent decrease in available ATP required for nerve function, including maintenance of microtubules and molecular motors, dyneins and kinesins, responsible for fast axonal flow. Laser-induced neural blockade is a consequence of such changes and provide a mechanism for a neural basis of laser-induced pain relief. The repeated application of laser in a clinical setting modulates nociception and reduces pain. The application of laser therapy for chronic pain may provide a non-drug alternative for the management of chronic pain.

The effect of 300 mW, 830 nm laser on chronic neck pain: a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled study.

A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study of low-level laser therapy (LLLT) in 90 subjects with chronic neck pain was conducted with the aim of determining the efficacy of 300 mW, 830 nm laser in the management of chronic neck pain. Subjects were randomized to receive a course of 14 treatments over 7 weeks with either active or sham laser to tender areas in the neck. The primary outcome measure was change in a 10 cm Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) for pain. Secondary outcome measures included Short-Form 36 Quality-of-Life questionnaire (SF-36), Northwick Park Neck Pain Questionnaire (NPNQ), Neck Pain and Disability Scale (NPAD), the McGill Pain Questionnaire (MPQ) and Self-Assessed Improvement (SAI) in pain measured by VAS. Measurements were taken at baseline, at the end of 7 weeks' treatment and 12 weeks from baseline. The mean VAS pain scores improved by 2.7 in the treated group and worsened by 0.3 in the control group (difference 3.0, 95% CI 3.8-2.1). Significant improvements were seen in the active group compared to placebo for SF-36-Physical Score (SF36 PCS), NPNQ, NPAD, MPQVAS and SAI. The results of the SF-36 - Mental Score (SF36 MCS) and other MPQ component scores (afferent and sensory) did not differ significantly between the two groups. Low-level laser therapy (LLLT), at the parameters used in this study, was efficacious in providing pain relief for patients with chronic neck pain over a period of 3 months.

Systematic review of the literature of low-level laser therapy (LLLT) in the management of neck pain.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Low-level laser therapy (LLLT) is widely used in the treatment of musculoskeletal pain. However, there is controversy over its true efficacy. We aimed to determine the efficacy of LLLT in the treatment of neck pain through systematically reviewing the literature. STUDY DESIGN/MATERIALS AND METHODS: A search of computerized bibliographic databases covering medicine, physiotherapy, allied health, complementary medicine, and biological sciences was undertaken undertaken from date of inception until February 2004 for randomized controlled trials of LLLT for neck pain. A comprehensive list of search terms was applied and explicit inclusion criteria were developed a priori. Twenty studies were identified, five of which met the inclusion criteria. RESULTS: Significant positive effects were reported in four of five trials in which infrared wavelengths (lambda = 780, 810-830, 904, 1,064 nm) were used. Heterogeneity in outcome measures, results reporting, doses, and laser parameters precluded formal meta-analysis. Effect sizes could be calculated for only two of the studies. CONCLUSIONS: This review provides limited evidence from one RCT for the use of infrared laser for the treatment of acute neck pain (n = 71) and chronic neck pain from four RCTs (n = 202). Larger studies are required to confirm the positive findings and determine the most effective laser parameters, sites and modes of application.

A systematic review of low level laser therapy with location-specific doses for pain from chronic joint disorders.

We investigated if low level laser therapy (LLLT) of the joint capsule can reduce pain in chronic joint disorders. A literature search identified 88 randomised controlled trials, of which 20 trials included patients with chronic joint disorders. Six trials were excluded for not irradiating the joint capsule. Three trials used doses lower than a dose range nominated a priori for reducing inflammation in the joint capsule. These trials found no significant difference between active and placebo treatments. The remaining 11 trials including 565 patients were of acceptable methodological quality with an average PEDro score of 6.9 (range 5-9). In these trials, LLLT within the suggested dose range was administered to the knee, temporomandibular or zygapophyseal joints. The results showed a mean weighted difference in change of pain on VAS of 29.8 mm (95% CI, 18.9 to 40.7) in favour of the active LLLT groups. Global health status improved for more patients in the active LLLT groups ( relative risk of 0.52; 95% CI 0.36 to 0.76). Low level laser therapy with the suggested dose range significantly reduces pain and improves health status in chronic joint disorders, but the heterogeneity in patient samples, treatment procedures and trial design calls for cautious interpretation of the results.