REVIEW article

Front. Endocrinol., 19 March 2024

Sec. Clinical Diabetes

Volume 15 - 2024 | https://doi.org/10.3389/fendo.2024.1303638

Diabetes in spotlight: current knowledge and perspectives of photobiomodulation utilization

  • 1. Univ. Grenoble Alpes, INSERM U1055, Pharmacy Department, Grenoble Alpes University Hospital, Laboratory of Fundamental and Applied Bioenergetics, Grenoble, France

  • 2. Univ. Grenoble Alpes, CEA-Leti, Clinatec, Grenoble, France

  • 3. Univ. Grenoble Alpes, INSERM U1055, Diabetology and Endocrinology Department, Grenoble Alpes University Hospital, Laboratory of Fundamental and Applied Bioenergetics, Grenoble, France

Abstract

Introduction:

Diabetes is a global health concern characterized by chronic hyperglycemia resulting from insulinopenia and/or insulin resistance. The rising prevalence of diabetes and its associated complications (ulcers, periodontitis, healing of bone defect, neuropathy, retinopathy, cardiopathy and nephropathy) necessitate innovative therapeutic approaches. Photobiomodulation (PBM), involves exposing tissues and cells to low-energy light radiation, leading to biological effects, largely via mitochondrial activation.

Methods:

This review evaluates preclinical and clinical studies exploring the potential of PBM in diabetes and its complications, as well all clinical trials, both planned and completed, available on ClinicalTrials database.

Results:

This review highlights the variability in PBM parameters across studies, hindering consensus on optimal protocols. Standardization of treatment parameters and rigorous clinical trials are needed to unlock PBM’s full therapeutic potential. 87 clinical trials were identified that investigated PBM in diabetes mellitus (with 5,837 patients planned to be treated with PBM). Clinical trials assessing PBM effects on diabetic neuropathy revealed pain reduction and potential quality of life improvement. Studies focusing on wound healing indicated encouraging results, with PBM enhancing angiogenesis, fibroblast proliferation, and collagen density. PBM’s impact on diabetic retinopathy remains inconclusive however, requiring further investigation. In glycemic control, PBM exhibits positive effects on metabolic parameters, including glucose tolerance and insulin resistance.

Conclusion:

Clinical studies have reported PBM-induced reductions in fasting and postprandial glycemia without an increased hypoglycemic risk. This impact of PBM may be related to its effects on the beta cells and islets in the pancreas. Notwithstanding challenges, PBM emerges as a promising adjunctive therapy for managing diabetic neuropathy, wound healing, and glycemic control. Further investigation into its impact on diabetic retinopathy and muscle recovery is warranted.

1 Introduction

Diabetes is characterized by chronic hyperglycemia due to insulinopenia [type 1 diabetes (T1D)] and/or insulin resistance [type 2 diabetes (T2D)]. The International Diabetes Federation reported 537 million of potential cases of diabetes across the world in 2021 with an increment planned for 2045 at 783 million of potential cases (). As a result, diabetes caused 6.7 million of death in 2021 () and led to USD 966 billion health expenditures () partially due to numerous complications related to diabetes disease () such as macrovascular complication (ischemic cardiomyopathy, stroke and arteriopathy) () and microvascular complications: 1) retinopathy, diabetes is the first cause of non-traumatic blindness (), 2) nephropathy, diabetes is the first cause of dialysis, 3) amputation and 4) neuropathy (, ) leading to foot ulceration and exposing patient to a risk of lower limb amputation [diabetes is the first cause of non-traumatic amputation ()]. Finally, patients living with diabetes are also exposed to a risk of periodontitis (). Altogether, diabetic complications alter quality of life (, ). These complications can be prevented through optimal glycemic control and could be managed with some medicines (, ). However, despite optimal medical management, prevention of diabetic complications remains a challenge and additional treatment remains mandatory.

Light was used as potential of treatment since the ancient Egypt. The biological reaction to light and its therapeutic applications are not new. For example, the beneficial effect of light on neonatal jaundice, discovered in the 1950s, made phototherapy (with blue light with a wavelength between 420-490 nm) the main modality for its treatment (). Another example, the effects of light on mood, demonstrated in the 80s, made it possible to propose light therapy as a treatment for seasonal affective disorders, and it has recently been shown to have an effect comparable to antidepressants in episodes major depression ().

Photobiomodulation therapy (PBM), formerly called “Low level laser therapy”, is a phototherapy based on the exposure of tissues and cells to non-ionizing and very weak light radiation with a wavelength generally ranging from red (between 600-700 nm) to the near infrared (between 700-1400 nm) and resulting in biological effects following its absorption by endogenous chromophores. Historically, PBM was first described by Endre Mester in 1968 who observed faster hair regrowth in rodents exposed to a low-energy laser with a wavelength of 694 nm (, ). In the same years, it was also developed by the National Aeronautics and Spatial Administration (NASA) to accelerate the healing and regeneration of muscle cells in astronauts (). For the past decades, biomedical research relating to PBM has been constantly increasing, indicating a growing interest in its therapeutic potential. Interest in PBM has also been linked to technical developments in illumination technology, with the improvement of LEDs, which are cheaper, safer and give off less heat than lasers (). Depending on the targeted use, and the illumination device, PBM can be brought along white light, to have the full spectrum of wavelength as a natural light, or along LED to obtain mainly a light targeted around a wavelength, or a laser to deliver only a define wavelength. At the beginning of the 2000s, the use of PBM in aesthetics (hair regrowth, wrinkle reduction) and sports recovery helped to democratize its use. Photobiomodulation is now used to help heal damaged tissues, improve immune response, reduce inflammation, and was recommended to prevent or treat certain side effects of treatments such as chemotherapy and radiotherapy (mucositis and radiodermatitis). In 2010, the first clinical authorization was reached as therapeutics for pain in conditions such as osteoarthritis. Since the 2020s, based on successful preclinical researches, various clinical trials have been initiated to evaluate PBM as a treatment to slow down neurodegenerative diseases, such as Alzheimer’s or Parkinson’s diseases (, ). Over the past three years (2020–2022), approximately 850 articles per year have been published and referenced in MEDLINE.

The main mechanism of action involves the mitochondria (), possessing photo-acceptors sensitive to the lengths used with PBM. Briefly, PBM has been reported to activate non-mitochondrial cellular functions (light/heat-gated ion channels) and restore mitochondrial function (through interfacial water and/or activation of cytochrome C oxidase), resulting in a short-term increase adenosine triphosphate (ATP) energy production in body cells and increased production of NO. This process leads to long-term effects, with the expression of various stimulatory and protective genes. The main biological effects highlighted in preclinical and clinical studies are an anti-inflammatory, analgesic action, an increase in blood circulation, angiogenesis, and a healing/regeneration and tissue proliferation action (26). Given these effects, the potential therapeutic applications are numerous. PBM is already used in certain medical disciplines. It is part, for example, of the recommendations for the prevention of mucositis in patients treated by radiotherapy.

The use of PBM in the context of neurodegenerative diseases, and in particular Parkinson’s disease, is currently being studied and is the subject of clinical trials. PBM could represent an innovative therapeutic solution, to slow down the neurodegenerative process. The preclinical results in this direction are very encouraging, and clinical data should be published soon due to ongoing clinical trials. The metabolic syndrome in neurodegenerative diseases, and in particular Parkinson’s disease, are well established (, ). The observed effect of PBM on cellular metabolism, inflammatory and scarring processes is a lead that may indicate an interest of PBM in the regulation of phenomena related to metabolic syndromes, such as diabetes.

In the present work, the purpose is to review the clinical studies using PBM and conducted in the field of the treatment of diabetes and diabetic complications.

2 Materials and methods

Identification was made regarding:

  • - Pre-clinical (animal study) and clinical data available until 23 May 2023

  • - Clinical trials available on clinicaltrials.gov (27) until 23 May 2023

2.1 Searching strategy and selection criteria of papers

A MEDLINE research was conducted via PubMed using the search terms: [(Photobiomodulation) or (Low-level laser therapy) or (Near-infrared therapy)] AND (diabetes or diabetic or T1D or T2D) AND (1900/01/01:2023/05/23[edat]). In addition, references from cited papers were investigated. For each paper, the following parameters were recorded: 1st author, year of publication, model used (including the number of patients in clinical trials), wavelength, light source (LED or laser), mode of administration (continuous or pulsed), PBM parameters (power density in mW/cm², time per exposure, energy density in J/cm², frequency, sites), and the study’s conclusion. The data were analyzed both collectively and individually, considering different diabetes conditions such as retinopathy, ulcers, and periodontitis. In the case of clinical trial papers, it was specified whether they were randomized clinical trials (RCTs), pre-post interventional trials (Pre-Post ITV) or observational studies.

2.2 Searching strategy for clinical trials and classification

The screening of the ClinicalTrials database (27) was conducted using three terms: photobiomodulation, low-level laser therapy and near-infrared therapy. Only trials related to diabetes were considered eligible, and studies employing methods other than PBM were excluded (Figure 1). For each included trial, the following parameters were recorded: starting date, country of the sponsor, expected number of enrolled patients, and enrolment status (not yet recruiting, recruiting, enrolling by invitation, active, suspended, terminated, completed, withdrawn, or unknown). Regarding clinical trials published in the Medline database, the following parameters were recorded: country of the sponsor and number of enrolled patients. All these trials were classified as completed.

Figure 1

3 Results

Following Medline research, 124 articles met the search criteria. 170 different exposure times were studied and varied widely, with 35% of the studies (60/168) having exposure times (for one session) of less than a minute and 35% (59/168) exceeding 5 min (Figure 2). Laser was the predominant light source investigated in 80% of the studies (Figure 2), and continuous exposure was the primary mode of administration (84% of studies, Figure 2). The power density values ranged from 1 mW/cm² to 8.32 W/cm², whereas the energy density ranged from 0.03 to 420 J/cm². These studies investigated various wavelengths ranging from 425 to 1064 nm, with 82% of studies between 600 and 900 nm, and six studies exploring multiple wavelengths applying simultaneously (Figure 2). It should be noted that these parameters were not fully described or available in 37 studies (29%).

Figure 2

3.1 Clinical trials in humans

42 trials were identified in ClinicalTrial database (27), and 56 articles were found in Medline. After removing duplicate trials, 87 were conducted or planned (Figure 2). These trials included 5,837 patients (see Table 1 for details). The top three countries planning to conduct trials on PBM and diabetes were the United States (n = 19), Brazil (n = 18), and India (n = 10, Figure 3). 50% of publications were by completely independent teams (n = 21 articles). Regarding diabetic neuropathies, two teams each published three studies: Burke et al. (2830), and Arun G et al. (3133). Regarding diabetes chronic periodontitis, three teams each published 2-3 studies: Chava et al. (34, 35), Haaki et al. (36, 37), and Obradovic et al. (3840). Regarding performance and functionality during or after exercise in patient with diabetes Ferraresi et al. (4143). published three studies. Finally, two teams have published on neuropathic pain and diabetic ulcers: Arisawa et al. (44, 45), and Schindl et al. (4648).

Table 1

Status of studiesNumber of studiesExpected number of participants
Active, not recruiting180
Completed664954
Not yet recruiting2160
Recruiting5300
Suspended160
Terminated475
Unknown status6208
Withdrawn20
Total875837

Number of patients treated in clinical trials with PBM for diabetes condition.

These numbers of participant represent the expected enrolment for trial not already completed.

Figure 3

3.2 Impact of PBM on diabetic neuropathy

A total of 23 studies were conducted, including 5 on preclinical models- (4953) and 18 in humans (2833, 46, 5463) (Table 2).

Table 2

Author/YearModelWave (nm)LightPBM parametersConclusions
Vieira
2022 (49)
Lewis rat
Streptozotocin induced
904Continuous laser7W/cm², 29sec, 203J/cm²
Frequency: once a day
Site: 1, dorsal, direct contact
↓ pain
↓ cytokines (TNFα, IL-1β, IL-10)
No effect on metabolic parameters
Rocha
2021 (50)
Wistar rat
Streptozotocin induced
904Continuous laser340mW/cm², 18sec, 6,23J/cm²
Frequency: once a day, for 10 days
Site: on sciatique nerve routes, direct contact
Restore fusion/fission mitochondria dynamic
Vieira
2019 (51)
Lewis rat
Streptozotocin
induced
904Continuous laser7W/cm², 29sec, 203J/cm²
Frequency: once a day for 8 days
Sites: 4 points, direct contact
↓ pain
Abdel-Wahhab
2018 (52)
Albinos rat
Streptozotocin induced
808Continuous laser30sec, 90J*
Frequency: 3 times a week for 8 weeks
Sites: 3 points
↓ pain
↓ PGE2, TNFα, IL1β, IL10
da Silva Oliveira
2018 (53)
C57BL6 mice
Streptozotocin induced
660Continuous laser107mW/cm², 15sec, 1.6J/cm²
Frequency: once a day, for 21 days
Site: 1, plantar hind paw, direct contact
↓ pain
Prevent myelin degenerescence
↓ loss of C fiber
Rastogi
2021 (54)
Human, n = 38
Diabetes
RCTT
890LED
Unknown
30min, 58.5J/cm²/min
Frequency: 3 times a week, for 12 weeks
Sites: 4, plantar foot x2, posterior & anterior distal leg
↓ pain (VAS decrease of 5.3 vs. 3 at 3 months)
↑ QoL (Norfolk-QoL DN 8 vs. 12 at 3 months)
No effect on cutaneous reinnervation
Anju
2020 (31)
Human, n = 50
T2D
Pre-Post ITVø
632.8Continuous laser5.7mW/cm², 9min, 3.1J/cm²
Frequency: once a day, for 10 days
Sites: 2, plantar and dorsal foot
↓ vibration perception threshold
↓ neurone specific enolase
da Silva Leal
2020 (44)
Human, n = 30
T2D
RCT
660Continuous laser1.66mW/cm², 30min, 3J/cm²
Frequency: once a day, for 10 days, 20 days washout and start 2 times more
Site: 1, radial artery region, direct contact
↓ pain
VAS: no change vs. decrease of 3 points
LANSS: no change vs. decrease of 3 points
Pain detect questionnaire: no change vs. decrease of 5 points
↑ QoL (SF-36, all parameters increase)
Anju
2019 (32)
Human, n = 40
T2D
Pre-Post ITVø
632.8Continuous laser5.7mW/cm², 9min, 3.1J/cm²
Frequency: once a day, for 10 days
Sites: 2, plantar and dorsal foot
↑ Mg and Vitamin D
Kumar
2015 (55)
Human, n = 19
T2D
Pre-Post ITVø
660 + 850Continuous laser5.7mW/cm², 9min, 3.1J/cm²
Frequency: once a day, for 10 days
Sites: 2, plantar and dorsal foot, direct contact
↓ pain (VAS: decrease of 5.2 points after 10 days)
↓vibration perception threshold
↑ microcirculation
Bashiri
2013 (56)
Human, n = 60
T1D & T2D
RCT
780Continuous laser8.3mW/cm², 5min, 2.5J/cm²
Frequency: 2 times a week, for 4 weeks
Site: unknown
↓ pain (VAS: score of 7.9 vs. 5.9 for PBM after 4 weeks)
Yamany 2012 (33)Human, n = 30
T2D
RCT
850Continuous laser6.3mW/cm², 15min, 5.7J/cm²
Frequency: 3 times a week, for 4 weeks
Sites: 2, plantar surface of foot, lombo-sacral area, 30cm above the area
↓ pain (VAS; score of 6.9 vs. 5.3 for PBM after 4 weeks)
↑ microcirculation
↑ sural nerve conduction
No effect on peroneal nerve
Khamesh
2011 (57)
Human, n = 27
T2D
Pre-Post ITV
800Continuous laser1W*
Frequency: 10 sessions
Sites: 6 paravertebral points, 4 on sciatic nerve routes
↑ neuronal potential amplitude
905Pulsed laser25W*, 10J/cm²
Frequency: 10 sessions
Sites: 6 paravertebral points and 4 on sciatic nerve routes
↑ neuronal potential amplitude
Swisloki
2010 (58)
Human, n = 121
Diabetes
RCT
870Continuous laser350W*, 7min, 1800J*
Frequency: Once a day, 4 days
Sites: 16 on each foot
Restauration sensation
No effect on pain (VAS, PQAS)
No effect on quality of life (SF-36)
Lavery 2008 (59)Human, n = 60
Diabetes
RCTø
890Continuous LED40min, 1,3J/cm²/min
Frequency: once a day, for 90 days
Sites: 4, plantar foot x2, medial & lateral side of the calf
No effect on pain (VAS)
No effect on QoL (Neuro QoL)
No effect on peripheral sensation
Arnall 2006 (60)Human, n = 22
T1D & T2D
RCT (for foot)
880
+
650
Pulsed LED30min
Frequency: 3 times a week, for 8 weeks
Sites: 2, volar and dorsum of foot
↑ mechanical sensation
↓ perception threshold
↑ peripheral protective sensation
Harkless 2006 (28)Human, n = 979
Diabetes
Pre-Post ITVø
890Pulsed laserUnknown↓ pain (VAS: decrease of 4.8 points)
↑ foot sensation
Clifft 2005 (61)Human, n = 70
Diabetes
RCTø
890Continuous laser30min, 58.5J/cm²/min
Frequency: 3 times a week, for 4 weeks
Sites: 4, plantar foot x2, posterior & anterior distal leg
No effect on sensation
DeLellis
2005 (29)
Human, n = 790
T2D
Pre-Post ITVø
890Pulsed laserNo detail↓ sensitivity impairment
Restauration protective sensation
Leonard
2004 (62)
Human, n = 27
T1D & T2D
Pre-Post ITVø
890Continuous laser40min, 50J/cm²
Frequency: 3 times a week, for 4 weeks
Sites: 4, inferior member
↓ pain (VAS: decrease of 2.3 points after 4 weeks)
↓place without sensation
Restauration protective sensation
Zinman
2004 (63)
Human, n = 50
Diabetes
RCT
905Continuous laser60mW*, 5min
Frequency: 2 times a week, for 4 weeks
Sites: 2 painful sites, direct contact
No effect on pain (p = 0.07) (VAS)
Kochman 2002 (30)Human, n = 49
T1D & T2D
Pre-Post ITV
UnknownContinuous laser30min
Sites: 4, Posterior & anterior tibia, dorsal & ventral foot
↓ sensitive impairment
↑ neural function (hot/cold discrimination)
Schindl
2002 (46)
Human, n = 30
Diabetes
RCTø
632.8Continuous laser30J/cm²
Frequency: Once
Site: 1
↑ microcirculation

Effects of PBM on diabetic neuropathy.

T: no other treatment for pain, :treatments for pain are permitted, but must be balanced and not change during the course of the study (i.e. amitryptilin, gabapentin, tramadol), ø: no information provided about other treatment during the study, IL, Interleukin; LANSS, Leeds assessment of neuropathy symptoms and signs; LED, Light emitting diode; PBM, photobiomodulation; PQAS, Pain qualities assessment scale; Pre-Post ITV, Pre-post interventional trial; QoL, Quality of life; RCT, randomized controlled trial; T1D, Type 1 diabetes; T2D, Type 2 diabetes; TNF, Tumor necrosis factor; VAS, Visual analogic scale. *Surface of PBM not reported.↑, increse; ↓, decrease.

3.2.1 Pain investigation

Among 14 studies investigating pain, 11 reported a decrease in pain after PBM, with 4 studies conducted on preclinical models and 7 on clinical subjects. In clinical trials, pain was evaluated using a visual analogic scale (VAS), either alone or in combination with other pain assessment scores with a follow-up period ranging from 4 to 90 days. For pre-post interventional trials (n = 3), the VAS scores decreased by an average of 2.3 to 5.2 points after PBM. In RCTs (n = 4), the VAS scores decreased more in the PBM group than in the control group (0 to 3 points vs. 3 to 5 points after 10 days) (44, 54), and the VAS scores at the end of the follow-up period were lower in the PBM group than in the control group (6.9-7.9 vs. 5.9-5.3) (33, 56).

3.2.2 QoL investigation

Four studies investigated the effect of PBM on QoL. Two studies reported a positive impact of PBM on QoL associated with a decrease in pain (44, 54). Conversely, 2 studies did not report an impact of PBM on QoL but in these 2 studies PBM did not induced a decrease in pain (58, 59). The first study (58) used the highest power (350W), and the second study (59) used the longest exposure time (40 min) and application frequency (once a day for 90 days).

3.3 Impact of PBM on diabetic retinopathy

A total of 6 studies were conducted, including 4 studies on preclinical models (6467) and 2 studies in humans (68, 69) (Table 3). Preclinical studies consistently reported a positive effect of PBM on retinal structure associated with a decrease in oxidative stress. In clinical studies focusing on macular oedema, findings were divergent regarding improvement of visual acuity between the two identified studies (68, 69). However, no side effects were reported in either study.

Table 3

Author/YearModelWave (nm)LightPBM parametersConclusions
Ahmed
2021 (64)
Wistar rat
Streptozotocin induced
670Continuous laser5mW/cm², 90sec, 0.9J/cm²
Frequency: 2 times a week, for 6 weeks
Sites: 2, each eye, directly in eye
Improve structure of inner nuclear layer and retinal pigmented epithelium
↓ anatomical abnormalities
Cheng
2018 (65)
C57BL/6J mice
Streptozotocin induced
670Continuous LED25mW/cm², 240sec, 6J/cm²
Frequency: once a day, for 8 months
Site: 1, back of the animal
↓ degenerescence of retinal capillaries
↓ albumin accumulation in the inner nuclear and in the outer plexiform layers of the retina
Preservation of spatial frequency threshold contrast sensitivity
Saliba
2015 (66)
C57BL/6J mice
Streptozotocin induced
670Continuous LED20mW/cm², 240sec, 5J/cm²
Frequency: once a day, for 10 weeks
Site: Total body
↓ superoxyde in retina
↓ abnormalities induced in leukostasis
No effect on contrast sensitivity
Tang
2013 (67)
Lewis rat
Streptozotocin induced
670Continuous LED25mW/cm², 240sec, 6J/cm²
Frequency: once a day, for 10 weeks
Site: total body
↓ diabetes induced abnormality of retinal function and abnormalities of electroretinograms
↓ retinal ganglion cell death
Inhibited leukostasis
Shen 2020 (68)Human, n = 21
Diabetes
Pre-Post ITV
670Continuous LED25-100-200mW/cm², 90sec, 2.25-9-18J/cm²
Frequency: 12 sessions over 5 weeks
Site: fundus contact lens
↓ central macular thickness (100 and 200>25)
No effect on visual acuity
No adverse event
Eells
2017 (69)
Human, n = 10
Diabetes
RCT
670Unknown45mW/cm², 100sec, 4.5J/cm²
Frequency: 3 consecutive days per week, for 8 weeks
Sites: 2, each eye, directly in eye
↓ central retinal thickness
↑ visual acuity (+ 6 letters)

Effect of PBM on diabetic retinopathy.

: PBM in addition to the best standard of care, at the investigator discretion choice, LED, Light emitting diode; Pre-post ITV, Pre-post interventional trial; RCT, Randomized controlled trial.↑, increse; ↓, decrease.

3.4 Impact of PBM on glucose metabolism in T2D

A total of 9 studies were conducted, with 8 studies conducted on preclinical models (7078) and one study in humans (79) (Table 4). The preclinical studies consistently reported positive effects of PBM on metabolic parameters with an improvement in glucose tolerance [with a glucose tolerance test area under the curve (GTT AUC) decreasing by 12–28%], a decrease in insulin resistance [with a 22% decrease in homeostatic model assessment of insulin resistance (HOMA-IR (70)) and a 10% decrease in insulin tolerance test (ITT) AUC (72)] and a decrease in fasting glycemia. PBM also showed positive effects on lipid profiles with a reduction in free fatty acid, triglycerides and cholesterol levels. In the clinical study (79), PBM applied on eight muscles in patients with T2D resulted in a decrease in glycemia (fasting and 1h post-prandial glucose) observed 30 min to 12 h after PBM treatment. This decrease was evidenced by a reduction in the GTT AUC by 37% and a reduction of 1h postprandial glucose by 16%. Importantly, no additive effect of hypoglycemic treatment was observed and no hypoglycemia were reported.

Table 4

Author/YearModelWave (nm)LightPBM parametersConclusions
Min
2022 (70)
Diabetic Goto Kakizaki rat630Continuous LED3.7mW/cm², 600sec, 2.22J/cm²
Frequency: 1 session
Site: intra-duodenal
No effect
630
+
850
Continuous LED32.72mW/cm², 100sec, 3.6J/cm²
Frequency: 1 session
Site: intra-duodenal
↓ glucose intolerance at 4 weeks (↓GTT AUC about 14.5%)
↓ insulin resistance only at 1 week (↓HOMA-IR about 22%)
↑ expression of insulin in beta cells
Bonifacio 2021 (71)C57BL/6 mice
High fat diet
808Continuous laser3.57W/cm², 8sec, 30J/cm²
Frequency: 3 times a week, for 4 weeks
Site: 1, direct contact with skin in pancreas region
No effect on glucose tolerance (GTT)
No effect on insulin resistance (ITT)
No effect on fasting glycemia
No effect on body weight
No effect on pancreas morphology
No effect on adiposity tissue
No effect on pancreas morphology
Gong
2021 (72)
C57BL/6 mice
High fat diet
and mice C57BLK5 diabetic
635Continuous laser72.1mW/cm², 10min, 43.3J/cm²
Frequency: once a day, for 10 weeks
Sites: 2, direct contact with skin
↓ glucose intolerance (↓GTT AUC about 12%)
↑ insulin sensitivity (↓ITT AUC about 10%)
↓ fed glycemia (500 vs. 280mg/dL)
↓ fasted glycemia (490 vs. 200mg/dL)
↑ glycogen in muscle
↓ ectopic fat in muscle
↓ triglycerides and free fatty acid
Gong
2020 (73)
C57BL/6 mice
High fat diet
635Continuous laser72.1mW/cm², 10min, 43.3J/cm²
Frequency: once a day, for 10 weeks
Site: abdomen, direct contact with skin
↓ triglycerides, plasmatic FFA
↑ relative oxygen species
Guo
2020 (74)
C57BL/6 mice
High fat diet
635Continuous laser72.1mW/cm², 10min, 43.3J/cm²
Frequency: once a day, for 8 weeks
Site: abdomen, direct contact with skin
↓ glucose intolerance (GTT)
↑ insulin sensitivity (ITT)
Protect against obesity (weight similar to control)
Protect against hyperglycemia (glycemia similar to control)
↓ weight, glycemia, triglycerides, cholesterol, insulinemia
↓ hepatic steatosis
Silva
2020 (76)
Swiss albinos mice
High fat diet
630Continuous LED779.53mW/cm², 40sec, 31.18J/cm²
Frequency: 5 days per week, for 4 weeks
Sites: 5, direct contact with skin
↓ glucose intolerance (↓ GTT AUC about 28%)
↓ fasting hyperinsulinemia (↓insulin concentration by 3)
Silva
2018 (77)
Swiss albinos mice
High fat diet
780Continuous laser259mW/cm², 40sec, 10J/cm²
Frequency: 5 days per week, for 4 weeks
Sites: 5, direct contact with skin
↓ glucose intolerance (↓ GTT AUC about 16%)
No effect on insulin resistance (HOMA-IR)
↓ fatty mass epididymal
↓ total cholesterol
↑ insulin signaling pathway
Yoshimura
2016 (78)
C57BL/6 mice
High fat diet
843Continuous LED19mW/cm², 300sec, 5.7J/cm²
Frequency: day 1, 3, 7, 10, 14 and 21
Site: abdomen, direct contact with skin
↓ glycemia (98 vs. 118 mg/dL for non-treated group)
No effect on weight
↓ abdominal fatty infiltration
Scontri 2023 (79)Human, n = 10
T2D
RCT
830Continuous LED114.28mW/cm², 50 or 120sec, 5.71 or 13.71J/cm²
Frequence: One session and 7 days of washout
Sites: 8, muscles, in contact with skin
Effect only with 5.71J/cm²
↓ post prandial glycaemia (30 min to 12h after PBM)
Better effect on glycemic control than hypoglycemic treatments
↓ GTT AUG around 37%
Faster glucose decay post prandial
(16%, -60 vs. -70mg/dL/h)
No additive effect with hypoglycemic treatments

Effect of PBM on glucose metabolism in T2D.

: PBM in addition to the best standard of care, at the investigator discretion choice, AUC, Area under the curve; FFA, Free fatty acid; GTT, glucose tolerance test; HOMA-IR, Homeostasis model assessment insulin resistance; ITT, insulin tolerance test; LED, Light emitting diode; PBM, photobiomodulation; RCT, randomized controlled trial; T2D, Type 2 diabetes.↑, increse; ↓, decrease.

3.5 Impact of PBM on exercises and muscles in T2D

A total of 7 studies were conducted, including 3 studies on preclinical models (41, 80, 81) and 4 studies in humans (42, 43, 82, 83) (Table 5). In preclinical models, PBM has been demonstrated to have a positive impact on biochemical parameters, such as a decrease in oxidative stress and an increase in antioxidant activity. However, in clinical studies focusing on muscular performance and functionality during or after exercise, PBM has failed to show any improvement. No significant effects on the muscular performance were observed.

Table 5

Author/YearModelWave (nm)LightPBM parametersConclusions
da Silva Tonetto 2023 (80)Wistar rat
Streptozotocin and diet induced
660Continuous laser571mW/cm², 36.75sec, 21J/cm²
Frequency: 5 days per week, for 6 weeks
Sites: 2, medium and laterally of gastrocnemius
↓ oxidative activity
↑ antioxidative activity (↑super oxide dismutase)
de Oliveira
2019 (41)
Wistar rat
Streptozotocin induced
660Continuous laser250mW/cm², 16sec, 2J/cm²
Frequency: 3 times a week, for 3 weeks
Site: 1, dorsal
No effect on glucose concentration
No effect on muscle parameters if PBM was not associated with exercise
Frigero
2018 (81)
Wistar rat
Streptozotocin induced
808Continuous laser107.1mW/cm², 44sec, 4.71J/cm²
Frequency: 1/session of exercise
Sites: 3, gastrocnemius
↓ oxidative stress (↓ lactate, ↓ catalase,
↑ supe oxide dismutase)
↑ VO2 max and speed of run
Linares
2022 (42)
Humain, n = 13
DT2
RCTT
850Continuous LED375mW/cm², 140 to 1120 sec, 52.5-420J/cm²
Frequency: 1/session of exercise
Sites: 7, oblique and rectus abdomen, quadriceps femoris, triceps, hamstrings bilateral
↓ glycemia and lactate 15min after PBM
Improvement of cardiac parameters
Gobbi
2021 (82)
Humain, n = 17
DT2
RCTø
620Continuous LED52.86mW/cm², 96sec, 5.074J/cm²
Frequency: once a day, for 3 days
Sites: 4, ankle flexor and extensor bilaterally
No impact on muscular performance
No impact on muscular functionality
940Continuous LED33.7mW/cm², 106sec, 3.572J/cm²
Frequency: once a day, for 3 days
Sites: 4, ankle flexor and extensor bilaterally
No impact on muscular performance
No impact on muscular functionality
620
+
940
Continuous LEDSame parameters of 2 othersNo impact on muscular performance
No impact on muscular functionality
Milan-Mattos
2020 (43)
Humain, n = 7
T2D
RCTT
850Continuous LED375mW/cm², 40sec, 15J/cm² ou 80sec, 30J/cm²
Frequency: 1/session of exercise
Sites: 2, quadriceps and triceps bilaterally
No impact on baroreflex during or after exercise
No impact of PBM on cardiovascular autonomic control
Francisco
2019 (83)
Humain, n = 16
T2D
RCTT
850Continuous LED375mW/cm², 40sec, 15J/cm²
Frequency: 1/session of exercise
Sites: 2, quadriceps and triceps bilaterally
No impact of PBM on lactate concentration
No impact on cardiopulmonary and hemodynamic adjustments

Effect of PBM on exercise and muscle in T2D.

T, no other treatment for pain; ø, no information provided about other treatment during the study; LED, light emitting diode; PBM, photobiomodulation; RCT, Randomized controlled trial; T2D, Type 2 diabetes.↑, increse; ↓, decrease.

3.6 Impact of PBM on healing process

3.6.1 Wound healing

A total of 44 studies were conducted to evaluate impact of PBM on wound healing, including 31 studies on preclinical models (84114) and 13 studies on humans (45, 47, 48, 115124) (Table 6). In preclinical models, PBM had a predominantly positive effect on wound healing in 94% of studies. PBM improved various aspects of wound healing, including collagen density, fibroblast proliferation, angiogenesis, granulation tissue formation, and epithelialization. These effects were often accompanied by a decrease inflammatory marker. Only one study, which poorly described PBM parameters, did not report a positive effect of PBM (104). Most studies utilized wavelengths in the red to near-infrared spectrum, whereas studies investigating green wavelengths did not report positive effects of PBM (84, 94). In clinical studies, the majority (92%) reported a positive effect of PBM on chronic ulcers healing. Among the 12 RCTs, there was an increase in wound closure ranging from 15% to 47.3% in the control group compared to 37% to 90.8% in the PBM group. Consequently, the PBM groups had smaller wound areas compared to the control groups, with measurements of 2.39 cm² vs. 8.43 cm² (120), indicating a decrease in wound area of approximately 3.2 cm² vs. 10.4 cm² (122). The only study that did not report a positive effect of PBM utilized the shortest exposure time (less than one second) (121). Two studies specified that PBM did not have any reported side effects (115, 117) while other studies did not explicitly mention it.

Table 6

Author/YearModelWave (nm)LightPBM parametersConclusion
Dungel 2023 (84)C57BL diabetic mice629Pulsed LED40mW/cm², 360sec, 14.4J/cm²
Frequency: day 0 and 1
Site: near to the wound
↑ wound closure
↑ angiogenesis
540Pulsed LED40mW/cm², 360sec, 14.4J/cm²
Frequency: day 0 and 1
Site: near to the wound
↑ wound closure
↑ angiogenesis
470Pulsed LED40mW/cm², 360sec, 14.4J/cm²
Frequency: day 0 and 1
Site: near to the wound
No effect
Ebrahimpour-Malekshah 2023 (85)Wistar rat
Streptozotocin induced
890Pulsed laser20mW/cm², 200sec, 1.08J/cm²
Frequency: once a day, for 14 days
Sites: 9, direct contact
↑ granulation tissue formation
↓ neutrophils, ↑ macrophages
↑ fibroblasts
↑ vascularization (VEGF)
Mehrvar
2021 (86)
Diabetic mice670Continuous LED60mW/cm², 90sec, 4.5J/cm²
Frequency: 5 days per week, for 2 weeks
Site: 1, next to the wound
↓ wound area
↓ oxidative stress
↑ Red-Ox ratio
Ahmadi
2020 (87)
Wistar rat
Streptozotocin induced
890Pulsed laser1mW/cm², 200sec, 0.2J/cm²
Frequency: once a day, for 14 sessions
Sites: 9, next to the wound
↑ wound healing
↓ inflammation (neutrophils)
↑ fibroblasts
↑ vascular length
Bagheri
2020 (88)
Wistar rat
Streptozotocin induced
890Continuous laser1mW/cm², 300sec, 0.324J/cm²
Frequency: once a day, for 7 days
Site: 1, next to the wound
↓ inflammation (macrophages, neutrophiles)
↑ fibroblast
Kouhkeil
2019 (89)
Rat
Streptozotocin induced
890Continuous laser1.08mW/cm², 200sec, 0.2J/cm²
Frequency: 6 days per week, for 2 weeks
Site: 1, next to the wound
↓ mast cells
↓ CFU
↑ wound strength
Fekrazad 2018 (90)Wistar rat
Streptozotocin induced
660Continuous laser30mW*, 33sec, 2J/cm²
Frequency: every 2 days, for 10 days
Site: near to the wound
No effect
810Continuous laser200mW*, 5sec, 2J/cm²
Frequency: every 2 days, for 10 days
Site: near to the wound
No effect
660 + 810Continuous laserSame parameters↓ TGF-β1
Asghari
2017 (91)
Wistar rat
Streptozotocin induced
890Pulsed laser0.324J/cm²
Frequency: 6 days per week, for 2 weeks
Site: 12, next to the wound
↑ wound healing
↓ CFU
Leite
2017 (92)
Wistar rat
Alloxan induced
660Continuous laser1W/cm², 9 or 130sec, 10 or 140J/cm²
Frequency: once a day, for 3 days
Site: 1, next to the wound
140J/cm² > 10J/cm²
↑ wound healing
↑ mast cells number, VEGF, FGF, neovascularization
↓ leukocytes number
Fahimipour
2016 (93)
Albinos mice
Streptozotocin induced
632.8Continuous laser250mW/cm², 16sec, 4J/cm²
Frequency: once a day, for 14 days
Sites: 2, next to the wound
632.8 > 830 to improve healing
↑ density of collagen fibers
↑ number of fibroblasts
↑ neovascularization
830Continuous laser250mW/cm², 16sec, 4J/cm²
Frequency: once a day, for 14 days
Sites: 2, next to the wound
=
Fekrazad
2015 (94)
Wistar rat
Streptozotocin induced
425Continuous laser55mW/cm², 36sec, 2J/cm²
Frequency: day 0, 1, 2, 4, 6, 8
Site: 1, next to the wound
Red > Blue & green
↑ wound healing
532Continuous laser50mW/cm², 40sec, 2J/cm²
Frequency: day 0, 1, 2, 4, 6, 8
Site: 1, next to the wound
=
630Continuous laser50mW/cm², 40sec, 2J/cm²
Frequency: day 0, 1, 2, 4, 6, 8
Site: 1, next to the wound
=
Dancáková
2014 (95)
SD rat
Streptozotocin induced
810Continuous laser30mW/cm², 30sec, 0.9J/cm²
Frequency: once a day, for 7 days
Site: 1, next to the wound
↑ wound healing
↑ wound tensile & strength
↑ granulation tissue
Aparecida da Silva
2013 (96)
Wistar rat
Streptozotocin induced
660Continuous laser1.43W/cm², 80sec, 4J/cm²
Frequency: one session
Site: 1, next to the wound
↑ collagen density
↓ MMP2 and MMP9
Fathabadie
2013 (97)
Wistar rat
Streptozotocin induced
890Pulsed laser1.08mW/cm², 200sec, 0.2J/cm²
Frequency: once a day, for 6 days
Sites: 18, next to the wound
↑ mast cells
Firat
2013 (98)
Wistar rat
Streptozotocin induced
940Continuous laser1.1W/cm², 9sec, 10J/cm²
Frequency: every 2 days, for 7 days
Site: 1, next to the wound
↓ inflammation
↑ collagen synthesis
↑ fibroblasts
Dadpay
2012 (99)
Wistar rat
Streptozotocin induced
890Pulsed laser1.08mW/cm², 30 or 300sec, 0.03 or 0.2J/cm²
Frequency: 6 days per week, for 2 weeks
Sites: 18, next to the wound
↑ Enhancing maximum stress and elastic modulus
Park
2012 (100)
SD rat
Streptozotocin induced
980Continuous laser232.5mW/cm², 60sec, 13.95J/cm²
Frequency: once a day, for 14 days
Site: 1, next to the wound
↓ inflammation cells infiltration
↑ number of fibroblasts
↑ wound healing
Hegde
2011 (101)
Swiss Albinos mice
Streptozotocin induced
632.8Continuous laser4.02mW/cm², 255 to 1277sec, 1 to 5J/cm²
Frequency: once
Site: 1, next to the wound
The best = 3J/cm²
↑ wound healing
↑ collagen synthesis
Peplow
2011 (102)
Diabetic mice660Continuous laser233-313mW/cm², 20sec, 2J*
116-156mW/cm², 40 sec, 2J*
58-78mW/cm², 80sec, 2J*
Frequency: once a day, for 7 days
Site: 1, next to the wound
Same effects between puissance
↑ wound healing
↑ epithelialization, granulation
Akyol
2010 (104)
Wistar rat
Streptozotocin induced
808Continuous laser100mW/cm², 20sec, 2J/cm²
Frequency: every 2 day, for 8 days
Site: 1, next to the wound
↑ wound healing
No effect on inflammation
No effect on epithelialization
Carvalho
2010 (103)
Wistar rat
Alloxan induced
660Continuous laser166mW/cm², 24sec, 4J/cm²
Frequency: unknown
Site: 1, next to the wound
↑ fiber of collagen
↓ macrophages
Chung
2010 (105)
Diabetic mice660Continuous laser10sec -> 1J*, 20sec -> 1.6J*, 40sec -> 3.2J*
Frequency: once a day, for 7 days
Site: 1, next to the wound
Best one = 1.6J/day
↑ wound healing
Santos
2010 (106)
Wistar rat
Streptozotocin induced
660Continuous laser30mW* -> 2,5J/cm²
Frequency: once a day, for 8 days
Sites: 16, next to the wound
790 better than 660
↑ angiogenesis
790Continuous laser40mW* -> 2,5J/cm²
Frequency: once a day, for 8 days
Site: 16, next to the wound
Al-Watban
2009 (107)
SD rat
Streptozotocin induced
532Continuous laser20.4mW/cm², 290 to 1470sec, 5 to 30J/cm²
Frequency: 3 times per week
Best = Laser 633
↑ wound healing
633Continuous laser15.56mW/cm², 322 to 1932sec, 5 to 30J/cm²
Frequency: 3 times per week
810Continuous laser22.2mW/cm², 225 to 1350sec, 5 to 30J/cm²
Frequency: 3 times per week
980Continuous laser22.2mW/cm², 225 to 1350sec, 5 to 30J/cm²
Frequency: 3 times per week
1060Continuous laser66.37mW/cm², 75 to 450sec, 5 to 30J/cm²
Frequency: 3 times per week
510-872Continuous LED13.6mW/cm², 367 to 2206sec, 5 to 30J/cm²
Frequency: 3 times per week
This was a polychromatous LED
Güngörmüş
2009 (108)
Wistar rat
Streptozotocin induced
808Continuous laser10J/cm²
Frequency: every 2 days for 8 days
Site: unknown
↑ wound healing
Maiya
2009 (109)
Wistar rat
Alloxan induced
632.8Continuous laser10mW/cm², 3 to 27min, 3 to 9J/cm²
Frequency: 5 days per week until wound healing
Site: 1, next to the wound
3 to 7J/cm²:
↑ epithelialization, tissue granulation
↑ wound healing
8-9J/cm²: ↓ reparative process
Carvalho
2006 (110)
Wistar rat
Alloxan induced
632.8Continuous laser200mW/cm², 60sec, 4J/cm²
Frequency: once a day, for 14 days
Site: 1, next to the wound
↑ fiber of collagen
Rabelo
2006 (111)
Wistar rat
Streptozotocin induced
632.8Continuous laser588mW/cm², 17sec, 10J/cm²
Frequency: once a day, for 15 days
Site: 1, next to the wound
↓ wound area
↓ local inflammation
↓ inflammatory cells
Maiya
2005 (112)
Wistar rat
Alloxan induced
632.8Continuous laser4.8J/cm²
Frequency: 5 days per week until wound healing
Site: 1, next to the wound
↑ collagen
↑ fibroblastic and capillary proliferation
↑ granulation tissue formation, vascularization, epithelialization
Byrnes
2004 (113)
Purina sand rat chow 5L09
DT2 model
632.8Continuous laser16mW/cm², 250sec, 4J/cm²
Frequency: once a day, for 3 days
Site: 1, next to the wound
↑ wound closure
↑ collagen, bFGF
↑ neovascularization
Reddy
2001 (114)
SD rat
Streptozotocin induced
632.8Continuous laser1J/cm²
Frequency: once a day, for 5 days
Site: 1, next to the wound
↑ collagen
↑ maximum strain
↑ toughness
Haze
2022 (115)
Human, n = 20
Diabetes
RCT
808Continuous laser138mW/cm², 8min, 1.1J/cm²
Frequency: once a day, for 12 weeks
Site: next to the wounds
↓ wound area (12.5 vs. 1.5cm²)
↑ wound closure (49.4 vs. 97.3%)
No side effects link to PBM
Vitoriano
2019 (116)
Human, n = 12
Diabetes
RCT (for 2 sources of light)
850Continuous LED240mW/cm², 22sec, 14.64J/cm²
Frequency: 2 times a week, for 5 weeks
Sites: 6, next to the wound
Laser seems better than LED
↓ wound area (1.45 to 0.64 vs 1.76 to 0.36cm²)
830Laser250mW/cm², 28sec, 15.48J/cm²
Frequency: 2 times a week, for 5 weeks
Sites: 3, next to the wound
de Alencar Fonseca Santos
2018 (45)
Human, n = 18
Diabetes
RCT
660Continuous laser490mW/cm², 13sec, 6J/cm²
Frequency: every 2 days, for 4 weeks
Site: 1, next to the wound
↑ wound healing index
↑ pressure ulcer scale for healing
No effect on pain (VAS)
Frangez
2018 (117)
Human, n = 60
Diabetes
RCT
625 (24%)
660 (71%)
850 (5%)
Pulsed LED5min, 2.4J/cm²
Frequency: 3 times a week, for 8 weeks
Site: 1, next to the wound
↑ Falanga score (score of healing)
No effect on size
Ruh
2018 (118)
Human, n = 8
Diabetes
Pre-Post ITV
660Continuous laser167mW/cm², 12sec, 2J/cm²
Frequency: once a day for 12 days
Site: 1, next to the wound
↓ wound size (data not shown)
↓ TNFα, ↑TGFβ, ↑VEGF
No effect on IL6
Mathur 2017 (119)Human, n = 30
T2D
RCT
660Continuous laser50mW/cm², 60sec, 3J/cm²
Frequency: once a day, for 15 days
Sites: 5-8, above the wound
↑ wound closure (15% vs. 37%)
No side effects
Carvalho
2016 (120)
Human, n = 32
DT2
RCT
658Continuous laser50mW/cm², 80sec, 4J/cm²
Frequency: 3 times a week, for 4 weeks
Site: 1, next to the wound
↓ wound area (8.43 vs. 2.39cm²)
↓ pain (VAS: 4.8 vs 1.9)
↑ neovascularization
Sandoval Ortíz 2014 (121)Human, n = 9
Diabetes
RCT
685Continuous laser̴11mW/cm², 0.14-0.18sec, 1.5-2J/cm²
Frequency: Unknown
Sites: multiple along the edges of the ulcer and in the wound bed, next to the wound
No effect on wound healing
No effect on protective sensation
No effect on QoL (EQ-5D)
Kajagar 2012 (122)Human, n = 68
T2D
RCT
660 + 850Pulsed LED60mW*, 2-4J/cm²
Frequency: once a day, for 15 days
Site: 1, above the wound
↓ ulcer area (decrease of 32 vs. 104cm²)
Kaviani
2011 (123)
Human, n =23
T2D
RCT
685Continuous laser50mW/cm², 200sec, 10J/cm²
Frequency: 6 days per week, at least 2 weeks
Site: 1, next to the wound
↑ wound closure (47.3% vs 73.7% after 4 weeks)
↑ wound healing (non-ischemic wound)
Minatel
2009 (124)
Human, n = 14
Diabetes
RCT
890
+
660
Continuous LED100mW/cm², 30sec, 3J/cm²
Frequency: 2 times a week, for 3 months
Site: 1, next to the wound
↑ granulation
↑ wound closure (43.3% vs. 90.8%)
Schindl 1999 (47)Human, n = 8
Diabetes
Descriptive
632.8Continuous laser30mW*, 30J/cm²
Frequency: 3 times a week until wound healing
Site: unknown
100% of closure of chronic ulcers after 32 to 130 sessions
Schindl
1998 (48)
Human, n = 30
Diabetes
RCT
632.8Continuous laser10mW/cm², 50min, 30J/cm²
Frequency: 1 time
Site: 1, skin surface
↑ skin temperature
↑ microcirculation in patient with microangiopathy

Effect of PBM on wound healing and ulcer.

: PBM in addition to the standard wound care (rising, cleaning, drying), CFU, colony forming unit; FGF, fibroblast growth factor; LED, Light emitting diode; MMP, Matrix metalloproteinases; PBM, Photobiomodulation; Pre-Post ITV, Pre-post interventional trial; QoL, Quality of life; Rat SD, Rat Sprague Dawley; RCT, Randomized controlled trial; T2D, Type 2 diabetes; TGF, Transforming Growth factor; TNF, Tumor necrosis factor; VAS, Visual analogic scale; VEGF, Vascular endothelial growth factor. *Surface of PBM not reported.↑, increse; ↓, decrease; =, equal/same.

3.6.2 Healing of bone defect

A total of 16 studies were conducted to evaluate impact of PBM on healing of bone defect, with 15 studies conducted on preclinical models (125139) and one study in humans (140) (Table 7). Among these studies, only one preclinical study did not report a positive impact of PBM on bone repair. This study used the highest power among all studies, with a dosage of 369.4J/cm². In addition to the effect of PBM on bone repair, several studies reported an increase in bone vascularization and a decrease in inflammation.

Table 7

Author/YearModelWave (nm)LightPBM parametersConclusions
Dalirsani
2021 (125)
Wistar rat
Streptozotocin induced
660Continuous laser76.4mW/cm², 24sec, 7.2J/cm²
Frequency: once a day, for 14 days
Site: 1, direct contact
↑ bone formation
↓ inflammation
↑ vascularization
802Continuous laser127.32mW/cm², 14sec, 7J/cm²
Frequency: once a day, for 14 days
Site: 1, direct contact
↓ inflammation
↑ vascularization
Lee
2021 (126)
Wistar rat
Streptozotocin induced
660Continuous laser2.42mW/cm², 1652sec, 4J/cm²
Frequency: once a day, for 12 weeks
Site: 1, near to the bone defect place
↑ bone formation
↑ bone fracture healing
No effect on osteogenic factor
Diker
2019 (127)
SD rat
Streptozotocin induced
808Continuous laser3.5W/cm², 22sec, 78.5J/cm²
Frequency: once a day, for 3 days
Site: 1, direct contact
↑ bone formation
↑ osteoblasts
Gomes
2018 (128)
Wistar rat
Streptozotocin induced
780Continuous laser16W/cm², 10, 20 or 40sec, 160, 320 or 640J/cm²
Frequency: every 2 days, for 21 days
Site: 1, direct contact
Only or 640J/cm²: Better maintenance of periodontal tissue subjected to a force
Mostafavinia
2018 (129)
Wistar rat
Streptozotocin induced
890Pulsed laser1.5W/cm², 1300sec, 1.5J/cm²
Frequency: 3 times a week, for 4 weeks
Sites: 3, direct contact
↑ bone formation
↑ bone cortical volume
↑ bone trabecular volume
↑ osteoblasts and osteocytes
Mostafavinia
2017 (130)
Wistar rat
Streptozotocin induced
890Pulsed laser8.32W/cm², 1300sec, 1.5J/cm²
Frequency: 3 times a week, for 4 weeks
Sites: 3, direct contact
↑ bone density
Yildirimturk
2017 (131)
SD rat
Streptozotocin induced
820Continuous laser0.5W/cm², 32sec, 16J/cm²
Frequency: 3 times a week, for 4 weeks
Site: 1, tibiae, direct contact
↑ bone formation
↑ vascularization
No effect of osteoblast quantity
Patrocínio Silva 2016 (132)Wistar rat
Streptozotocin induced
808Continuous laser3.57W/cm², 33sec, 120J/cm²
Frequency: 3 times a week, for 8 weeks
Site: 1, direct contact
↑ bone density
↑ bone mineral content stiffness
↑ cortical tibia area
Magri
2015 (133)
Wistar rat
Streptozotocin induced
808Continuous laser3.57mW/cm², 8 or 16 or 33sec, 30, 60 or 120J/cm²
Frequency: 3 times a week, for 4 weeks
Sites: 2, direct contact
↑ bone formation
No histological effect
Nascimento
2015 (134)
Wistar rat
Alloxan induced
780Continuous laser1.75W/cm², 10sec, 17.5J/cm²
Frequency: every 2 days, for 7 days
Site: 1, direct contact
↑ bone formation
↓ inflammation
↑ alkaline phosphatase
Patrocínio Silva
2014 (135)
Wistar rat
Streptozotocin induced
808Continuous laser3.57W/cm², 33sec, 120J/cm²
Frequency: 3 times a week, for 6 weeks
Sites: 4, direct contact
↑ bone density
↑ cortical area
↑ values of fracture force
↑ osteogenic potential
Akyol
2010 (136)
Wistar rat
Streptozotocin induced
808Continuous laser100mW/cm², 20sec, 2J/cm²
Frequency: every 2 days, for 7 days
Site: 1, right distal epiphysis
↑ bone repair
↑ substantia spongia formation
No effect on union bone marrow
Abdi
2009 (137)
Wistar rat
Alloxan induced
780Continuous laser318mW/cm², 1166sec, 369,4J/cm²
Frequency: 3 times a week, for 6 weeks
Sites: 2, direct contact
No effect on bone repair
Bayat 2009 (138)Wistar rat
Streptozotocin induced
632.8Continuous laser3.17mW/cm², 90 or 1200sec, 88.6 or 382.2J/cm²
Frequency: once a day, for 14 days
Sites: 4, direct contact
↑ bone density
↑ bone lamella meshwork
↑ maximum force and load at the break
↓ bend stiffness
Javadieh
2009 (139)
Wistar rat
Streptozotocin induced
890Pulsed laser265 or 530sec, 5 or 10J/cm²
Frequency: 3 times a week, for 6 weeks
Sites: 2, direct contact
↑ bone repair
↑ bending stiffness
↑ maximum force
Attia 2023 (140)Human, n = 40
T2D
RCTø
808Continuous laser125mW/cm², 1.23min, 0,15J/cm²
Frequency: 2 times, pre and post implantation
Sites: 6, direct contact
↑ bone repair and density
↑ bone structure

Effect of PBM on healing of bone defect.

ø: no information provided about other treatment during the study. Rat SD, Rat Sprague Dawley; RCT, Randomized controlled trial; T2D, Type 2 diabetes.↑, increse; ↓, decrease.

3.6.3 Chronic periodontitis

A total of 16 studies were conducted to evaluate the impact of PBM on chronic periodontitis in humans (3440, 141149) (Table 8).

Table 8

Author/YearModelWave (nm)LightPBM parametersConclusions
Kamatham
2022 (34)
Human, n = 60
T2D
RCTT
650Continuous laser0.4W*
Frequency: 1 session
Site: 1/tooth, in contact with gingival tissue
↓ inflammation
↓ calprotectin
No effect on probing depth, clinical attachment level
Pulivarthi
2022 (35)
Human, n = 30
T2D
RCT
650Continuous laser0.8W/cm², 15sec, 12J/cm²
Frequency: once a day, for 8 weeks
Sites: 3, in contact with gingival tissue
No effect on TNFα
No effect on bleeding index, probing depth, clinical attachment level
Mrasori
2021 (141)
Human, n = 80
T2D
RCT
660Continuous laser10mW*, 8min
Frequency: 5 days per week, for 3 months
Sites: 5, in contact with gingival tissue
↓ IL6
Soi 2021 (142)Human, n = 44
T2D
RCT
940Pulsed laser0.8W*, 15sec, 24J*
Frequency: unknown
Sites: 2/tooth, into the periodontal pocket
No effect of adjunction of PBM to SRP (scaling and root planning)
Koçak
2020 (36)
Human, n = 60
T2D
RCT
940Pulsed laser1.061W/cm², 20sec
Frequency: 1 session
Sites: 2/tooth, intra periodontal pocket
No effect on bacteria level
(P.gingivalis, T.forsythia, T.denticola)
Özberk
2020 (143)
Human, n = 22
T2D
RCT
980Continuous laser33mW/cm², 15sec, 0.5J/cm²
Frequency: day 0, 1, 3 and 7
Sites: 2/tooth, in contact with maxilla and mandibula
↓ probing depth (2.9 vs. 2.6 mm)
↓ clinical attachment level (3.0 vs. 2.8 mm)
No effect on plaque index and gingival index
Castro dos Santos
2019 (144)
Human, n = 24
T2D
RCT (on pocket)
660Continuous laser1.1W/cm², 20sec, 22J/cm²
Frequency: 1 session
Sites: 2, buccal and lingual
No effect on probing depth, clinical attachment level
Chandra
2019 (145)
Human, n = 40
T2D
RCT
808Continuous laser1.5-1.8W/cm², time in second
Frequency: 1 session
Site: 1, intra periodontal pocket
↓ plaque index (1.56 vs. 1.26)
↓ gingival index (1.56 vs. 1.04)
↓ probing depth (2.63 vs. 1.80)
↓ clinical attachment level (7.50 vs. 6.65)
↓ bacteria level (35% more reduction with PBM)
Dengizek Eltas
2019 (146)
Human, n = 40
T2D
RCT
810Continuous laser1W*, 15-20sec
Frequency: once a day
Sites: 3/tooth
↓ gingival index (0.91 vs. 0.58)
↓ bleeding on probing (31.7 vs. 24.7%)
↓ probing depth (2.99 vs. 2.77mm)
No effect on plaque index, clinical attachment level and inflammation (CRP)
Li 2018 (147)Human, n = 80
T2D
RCT
UnknownUnknownUnknown↓level of TNF, IL-1, LPS
Increase leptin
Demirturk-Gocgun
2017 (148)
Human, n = 22
T2D
RCT (on pocket)
808Continuous laser0.89W/cm², 5sec, 4.46J/cm²
Frequency: Day 1, 2 and 7
Sites: 4, in contact with gingival tissue
No effect on bleeding of probing, probing depth, clinical attachment level, plaque index
Koçak
2016 (37)
Human, n = 60
T2D
RCT
940Pulsed laser1.061W/cm², 20sec
Frequency: 1 session
Sites: 2/tooth, intra periodontal pocket
↓ VCAM
No effect on IL1/6/8/ICAM
Javed 2015 (149)Human, n = 22
T2D
RCT (on pocket)
1064Pulsed laser1430W/cm², 60 to 120sec (depending of the accessibility of the pocket), 240-480J*
Frequency: unknown
Site: 1/tooth, into the periodontal pocket
↓ plaque index (6.4 vs. 1.5) at 1 month, not 3 months
↓ bleeding probing (5.5 vs. 2.1) at 1 month, not 3 months
Obradović
2013 (38)
Human, n = 300
T1D, T2D
RCT
670Continuous laser2mW/cm², 16min, 2J/cm²
Frequency: once a day for 5 days
Site: 1, in contact with gingival tissue
↓ alteration of periodontium (histologic description)
Obradović
2012 (39)
Human, n = 200
T1D, T2D
RCT (on pocket)
670Continuous laser5mW*, 14min
Frequency: once a day, for 5 days
Site: 1, in contact with the jaws
↓ gingival index (0.31 vs. 0.16)
↓ inflammation
↑ cytomorphometric parameters
Obradović 2011 (40)Human, n = 150
T1D, T2D
Pre-Post ITV
UnknownUnknown5mW*
Frequency: for 5 days
Site: only right site of the jaw
↓ gingival index (data not available)
↓ nuclei areal

Effect of PBM on chronic diabetes periodontitis.

T: no other treatment for pain, : PBM in addition to non-surgical periodontal treatment (i.e. scaling and root planning, ultrasonic periodontal debridement), CRP: C reactive protein, ICAM: Intercellular adhesion molecule, IL: Interleukin, LPS: lipopolysaccharide, PBM: photobiomodulation, Pre-post ITV: Pre-post interventional trial, RCT: Randomized controlled trial, SRP: scaling and root planning, T1D: Type 1 diabetes, T2D: Type 2 diabetes, TNF: Tumor necrosis factor, VCAM: Vascular cell adhesion molecule, *Surface of PBM not reported.↑, increse; ↓, decrease.

▪ Effect on healing process

The effects of PBM were evaluated using the following measures:

  • 1) gingival index represents inflammation of the gingival tissue (150),

  • 2) the plaque index, which represents the presence of supragingival plaque on all four tooth surfaces (151).

Among the clinical studies, 11 were RCTs, 3 were RCTs specifically focused on pockets treated with PBM, and two were Pre-Post ITV. The results were heterogeneous, with a decrease in the plaque index observed in 50% of the studies, a decrease in the gingival index in 80% of the studies, a reduction in bleeding in 66% of the studies, a decrease in probing depth in 50% of the studies, and improvements in clinical attachment levels in 29% of the studies.

▪ Effect on bacterial population

Two studies investigated the effect of PBM on reducing the bacterial population at periodontitis sites, but the results were contradictory.

3.7 Others utilization described in diabetes mellitus

3.7.1 Erectile function

In a preclinical study, Yang et al. (152) reported a positive impact of PBM on erectile function two weeks after PBM exposure. This suggests a potential therapeutic effect of PBM on improving erectile function (Table 9).

Table 9

Author/YearModelWave (nm)LightPBM parametersConclusions
Yang 2023 (152)SD rat
Streptozotocin induced
808Laser4J/cm²
Frequency: for 2 weeks
Site: Unknown
↑ erectile function
↑ mitochondrial function and morphology
↓ oxidative stress
Asghari
2016 (153)
Wistar rat
Streptozotocin induced
685Continuous laser53.6mW/cm², 60sec, 3.2J/cm²
Frequency: H0, H1, H2
Sites: 6, direct contact with skin
↓ ischemia-reperfusion injury
↓ plasma creatinine
↓ tubular dilatation, glomerular atrophy
↑ glutathione, superoxide dismutase and catalase
Aghamohamdi
2020 (154)
Human, n = 30
Diabetes
Pre-Post ITV
830Pulsed laser334mW*, 60sec, 16J/cm²
Frequency: 3 times a week, for 4 weeks
Sites: 9, pathway of facial nerve, direct skin contact
Recovery in electromyogram in diabetic patient with Bell’s palsy
980Pulsed LED9min, 5J/cm²
Frequency: 3 times a week, for 4 weeks
Sites: 9, pathway of facial nerve, direct skin contact

Effect of PBM on other complications.

: PBM in addition to the best standard of care, LED, Light emitting diode; Pre-Post ITV, Pre-post interventional trial. *Surface of PBM not reported.↑, increse; ↓, decrease.

3.7.2 Ischemia reperfusion injury

Asghari et al. (153) conducted a preclinical study and demonstrated a protective effect of PBM against ischemia/reperfusion injury in the diabetic kidney. They observed a decrease in tubular epithelial necrosis, polymorphonuclear cells in the outer medulla, cellular oedema, tubular dilatation, hyaline casts, and medullary congestion. These findings indicate the potential of PBM in mitigating kidney injury associated with ischemia/reperfusion (Table 9).

3.7.3 Facial nerve palsy

Aghemohamdi et al. (154) demonstrated the positive impact of PBM in patients with T2D who experienced facial nerve palsy. After 12 sessions of PBM, 60% of the patients showed recovery on electromyogram without any reported side effects. However, the investigation of QoL outcomes were not investigated in this study (Table 9).

4 Discussion

This review shows a clear interest in the use of PBM in diabetes, both at preclinical (70 studies) and clinical level [56 studies out of 88 clinical trials identified by clinicaltrials.gov (27)]. However, the therapeutic effect of PBM is variable, with inconsistent illumination parameters that are not standardized across studies.

Regarding clinical trials, PBM has generated interest across various fields, with 2,573 clinical trials identified on clinicaltrials.gov (27). Although 42 clinical trials related to PBM in diabetes were found on clinicaltrials.gov (27), an additional 46 studies were identified through the Medline bibliographic search. Since PBM is not considered as a drug, the reporting of trials in the global clinical trials database is not consistent. Moreover, in some cases, trials may be reported directly to national registries, as seen in many studies conducted in Brazil. Another important point to note is that among the 67 completed trials, only 56 were published, indicating a significant publication bias (16%), which is likely underestimated. Moreover, quality of clinical trials must be upgraded, as there is heterogeneity in the number of patients included, in the presence of a control group and in the parameters used. Furthermore, in terms of clinical publications, few teams have conducted more than one study, amplifying the heterogeneity of the PBM parameters used.

Currently, there is no consensus on the optimal PBM parameters to achieve biological or clinical effects. In terms of light sources, some studies have reported superior effects with coherent laser light (155, 156). However, a recent review found no difference in efficacy between LEDs and laser sources, with LEDs being more cost-effective. In the context of diabetes and wound healing, two studies compared lasers and LEDs. Al-Watban et al. (107) reported a better efficacy of a 633 nm laser compared to LEDs with polychromatic light for ulcer healing, may be due to dilution of the effect as the irradiance was comparable for both. Vitoriano et al. (116) reported a greater reduction in ulcer size with an 830 nm laser compared to 850 nm LEDs (with comparable irradiance). Despite these two studies favoring lasers, numerous studies in the field of diabetes have reported positive effects of LED-based PBM. However, the choice between laser and LED was a technologic choice and could be led by the accuracy of wavelength search, the availability of the device and energetic consumption. It is important to note that the principle of PBM is based on the Arndt-Schultz law (), which describes a biphasic response. A dose that is too low will produce no effect while a dose that is too high can be toxic and induce mitochondrial permeabilization and apoptosis through activation of caspases (157). This biphasic response to PBM was reflected in two studies on ulcer healing in diabetes. Hedge et al. (101) tested a 632.8 nm laser with different irradiances ranging from 1 to 5 J/cm². While irradiances of 1 and 5 J/cm² resulted in poorer and slower wound healing, an irradiance of 3 J/cm² appeared to be optimal for improving and accelerating wound healing. Maiya et al. (109) tested a 632.8 nm laser with different irradiances ranging from 3 to 9 J/cm². Irradiances between 3 and 7 J/cm² had a positive effect on healing, including increased epithelialization, tissue granulation, and accelerated wound healing; whereas irradiances of 8 and 9 J/cm² hindered the healing process. To date, there is no consensus on the power or optimal irradiance to be applied, and the wavelength applied is another parameter of interest that lacks consensus and may depend on the target tissue. Red and near-infrared light correspond to the absorption wavelengths of cytochrome c oxidase in the mitochondria (). Green light, on the other hand, is rarely used and not very effective in inducing biological changes as it was not in the specter of absorption of cytochrome c oxidase. Two studies compared blue, green, and red wavelengths in diabetes. Dungel et al. (84) reported that blue light (470 nm) had no effect on wound healing, whereas green (540 nm) and red (629 nm) light accelerated wound healing. Fekrazad et al. (94) reported no effect of blue (425 nm) and green (532 nm) light, whereas red light (630 nm) promoted wound healing. Another study (93) reported that a 632.8 nm laser is more effective than an 830 nm laser for wound healing. Given these findings, it is logical that the most commonly used wavelengths (80 studies) fall within the red and near-infrared range (600–810 nm). In any case, numerous articles have shown that the effect of PBM depends on various parameters: wavelength, fluence (J/cm²), total energy received (J), pulsed or continuous emission mode … Moreover, the absorption characteristics of the tissue, as well as the delivery mode, and the frequency of use of the PBM (number of applications, treatment schedule etc.) add complexity. It is now necessary to standardize PBM parameters, and to precise them into papers; in order to be reproducible and identify effective application methods.

The first experiment to investigate the effect of PBM on healing showed promising results (, ). Extensive research has been conducted in this field, with several preclinical and clinical reviews reporting positive effects of PBM on wound healing (158), healing of bone defect (159), and periodontitis (160). In a specific population of patients with diabetes, the results regarding these healing processes were encouraging. Numerous preclinical studies have focused on ulcer and wound healing, demonstrating the beneficial effects of PBM. These effects include improved angiogenesis and associated trophic factors, increased fibroblasts, reduced inflammation, increased collagen quantity, and even a reduction in colony-forming units (CFU). Clinically, these results were supported by a significant reduction in wound area (by a factor of 3.5 to 8.2) and increased wound closure (ranging from 22% to 47.9%), which may be associated with reduced pain. Wound healing issues in patients with diabetes significantly impact their QoL (161). However, only one study (121) has examined the impact of PBM on the QoL of patients with diabetes and ulcers and did not demonstrate any beneficial effects of PBM on QoL. Overall, the data on wound healing are encouraging. The ideal parameters may involve repeated exposure over several weeks, at multiple sites as close as possible to the lesion, with a fluence between 1 and 10 J/cm², continuous illumination using LED or laser, and a wavelength ranging from 660 to 830 nm. In wound healing, PBM appeared as a sage approach to enhance healing process in addition to wound standard of care.

Regarding healing of bone defect, 94% of preclinical studies showed positive results (improved vascularization, increased osteoblasts and osteocytes, reduced inflammation, increased bone volumes, and enhanced bone density). Clinically, only one study (140) has been conducted, demonstrating improved bone repair, density, and structure after dental implant insertion with one session of PBM before and after implantation. However, conclusions cannot be drawn from a single clinical study, but the promising results from preclinical and clinical studies should motivate further clinical trials to determine the optimal parameters for PBM.

To date, only clinical studies have investigated the effects of PBM on periodontitis, yielding heterogeneous results due to variations in the applied parameters. The exposure periods ranged from a single session to several days or even weeks. Among studies that examined the gingival index, plaque index, and clinical attachment level, 75% reported improvements in at least one of these parameters. Four studies reported negative results: one had the highest fluence (144), one had the highest exposure frequency [once a day for 8 weeks (35)], one had poorly described illumination parameters and a wavelength beyond the infrared range (142), and one had four PBM exposure sites (148), whereas most studies reported one to two exposure sites. Finally, the ideal parameters could involve a single exposure or exposure over 2 to 3 days, on one to two sites in direct contact with gingival tissue or intra-pocket, with a fluence of 1 to a few J/cm², continuous or pulsed laser illumination, and a wavelength range of 650 to 1064 nm. These data have been supported by previous results on in vitro model (162) reporting positive response of fibroblasts to the PBM in diabetic hypoxic wounded models. Even if three teams published several studies, the lack of rigorous methodology and the heterogeneity of PBM parameters, did not allowed to identify leader in this field. Moreover, due to the wide variability in illumination parameters and obtained results, definitive conclusions regarding the therapeutic effects of PBM on periodontitis cannot be formally drawn. Further clinical trials are required to establish clearer conclusions and defined optimal PBM parameters to use PBM as an added therapy for diabetes chronic periodontitis management.

Regarding neuropathy, five preclinical studies reported a positive effect of PBM on pain, leading to a decrease in cytokines and improvement in mitochondrial parameters. Clinically, in 77% of the studies, a 2-5 points reduction on the VAS was observed for pain. Out of the studies that considered the impact of PBM on QoL (24%), two studies reported no effect (58, 59) (similarly, no effect on pain was observed), while two studies reported a 4-point improvement in Norfolk Quality of Life-Diabetic Neuropathy (54) and SF-36 scores on all these parameters (44). No adverse effects of PBM were reported in any of the studies. Two teams have been identified in this field. Unfortunately, studies of Burka et al. (2830). lack methodological rigor and a description of the PBM parameters used. On the other hand, Arun G et al. (3133), succeeded in demonstrating in their three studies (with the same PBM parameters used) an improvement of vibration perception threshold, decrease of pain, improvement of microcirculation and biological parameters. These benefits were observable as early as 10 days after daily PBM with 2 lasers (632.8 nm and 660 nm + 880 nm) over 9 min (3.1 J/cm² of fluence) on the plantar and dorsal surfaces of the feet. These parameters should therefore serve as a basis for future clinical trials aimed at defining whether MBP will be used instead of or in addition to current pharmacological treatments.

For diabetic retinopathy, only a few studies have been conducted in this field. Four preclinical studies reported promising results on the effect of PBM, showing histological improvements in the retina. However, clinically, only two studies reported a reduction in central macular thickness, with (69) or without (68) an improvement in vision. Therefore, it is not possible to conclude whether PBM must be used. Clinical trials must be conducted to demonstrate PBM safety in use and its efficacy as a complementary or alternative therapy to current therapeutic options.

PBM is also gaining popularity among its potential benefits for post-physical activity recovery, this fact was still a source of debate (163, 164). In the context of T2D, a limited number of studies (n = 7) have been conducted. The results of 3 preclinical studies reported positive effects of PBM on oxidative stress, antioxidant activity, and muscular parameters. However, clinically (n = 4), no study reported improvements in performance or muscle functionality. Only one study (42) reported a benefit in terms of lactate concentration and cardiac parameters. Based on these findings, it can be concluded that the current parameters used for PBM do not provide benefits for post-exercise muscle recovery in patients with T2D.

Lastly, since diabetes is a metabolic disease characterized by an imbalance in glycemic control, PBM has also been investigated in this field. Preclinical results have shown promising results, with 83% of the studies that examined glucose tolerance possibly due to a direct impact of PBM on islet insulin secretion capability and insulin resistance reporting an improvement in these parameters. The only negative study (71) applied the highest power (3.57 W/cm²) for the shortest period (8 seconds). Preclinical studies have also demonstrated beneficial effects of PBM on lipid profiles, including reduced ectopic fat in muscle, triglycerides, and free fatty acids. Additionally, a small-scale clinical study (79) (n = 10) reported beneficial effects of PBM, including a 37% reduction in post-meal AUC for glucose and approximately 16% faster postprandial glucose decay. No adverse effects were reported with PBM, and there was no increased risk of hypoglycemia when PBM was combined with hypoglycemic treatments. Overall, these findings support the potential of PBM in improving glycemic control in patients with type 2 diabetes. Further clinical trials with larger sample sizes are warranted to determine the optimal parameters for PBM as an additional therapy in the therapeutic arsenal, helping to improve patients’ glycemic control.

Moreover, the effect of PBM on glucose intolerance could be lead to the action of PBM on beta cells and islets.

Liebman et al. (165) reported improvement of insulin secretion of beta cells and glucagon of alpha cells associated with a rise of calcium activity. Irani et al. (166) demonstrated that PBM could improve insulin secretion of rat pancreatic islets with poor insulin secretion. Huang et al. (167) investigated the effects of PBM on pig islets, which are being explored as a potential source of islets for xenotransplantation. However, they did not observe any significant positive or negative effects on glucose-stimulated insulin secretion. Further research is needed to explore the potential of PBM to enhance islet function for transplantation purposes, even if Asghari et al. (153) reported protector effect of PBM on ischemia-reperfusion injury in diabetic kidney of rats.

5 Conclusion

Overall, this review highlights the growing interest in PBM as a potential therapeutic approach for various aspects of diabetes. This study emphasizes the potential of PBM as a valuable approach for managing wound healing issues and neuropathic pain in diabetic patients in both preclinical and clinical studies. The potential benefits of PBM in healing of bone defect and glycemic control show promise. In retinopathy, the small number of studies make it impossible to draw any conclusion. In periodontitis, more extensive clinical trials are warranted to establish the optimal parameters and protocols for PBM. Likewise, the current evidence does not support the use of PBM for muscle recovery after physical exercise.

Statements

Author contributions

QP: Writing – original draft, Resources, Methodology, Investigation, Formal analysis, Data curation, Conceptualization. CM: Writing – review & editing, Validation, Supervision, Funding acquisition. SL: Writing – review & editing, Validation, Supervision, Funding acquisition, Conceptualization.

Funding

The author(s) declare financial support was received for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article. This work was funded by the “Région Auvergne-Rhône-Alpes”, the Edmond J.Safra Foundation, the “Fond de Dotation-Clinatec” and its sponsors, CEA, UGA, CHUGA.

Acknowledgments

We thank J. Mitrofanis for his proofreading of English.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Publisher’s note

All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

References

  • 1

  • 2

    MarcovecchioMLLucantoniMChiarelliF. Role of chronic and acute hyperglycemia in the development of diabetes complications. Diabetes Technol Ther. (2011) 13:389−94. doi: 10.1089/dia.2010.0146

  • 3

    YamazakiDHitomiHNishiyamaA. Hypertension with diabetes mellitus complications. Hypertens Res Off J Jpn Soc Hypertens. (2018) 41:147−56. doi: 10.1038/s41440-017-0008-y

  • 4

    HenningRJ. Type-2 diabetes mellitus and cardiovascular disease. Future Cardiol. (2018) 14:491−509. doi: 10.2217/fca-2018-0045

  • 5

    PalauVRieraMSolerMJ. The reno-cardiovascular connection in the patient with Diabetes mellitus: What’s new? Endocrinol Diabetes Nutr. (2017) 64:237−40. doi: 10.1016/j.endien.2017.03.011

  • 6

    SabanayagamCBanuRCheeMLLeeRWangYXTanGet al. Incidence and progression of diabetic retinopathy: a systematic review. Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol. (2019) 7:140−9. doi: 10.1016/S2213-8587(18)30128-1

  • 7

    ZakinEAbramsRSimpsonDM. Diabetic neuropathy. Semin Neurol. (2019) 39:560−9. doi: 10.1055/s-0039-1688978

  • 8

    ZhangPLuJJingYTangSZhuDBiY. Global epidemiology of diabetic foot ulceration: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ann Med. (2017) 49:106−16. doi: 10.1080/07853890.2016.1231932

  • 9

    BarnesJAEidMACreagerMAGoodneyPP. Epidemiology and risk of amputation in patients with diabetes mellitus and peripheral artery disease. Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol. (2020) 40:1808−17. doi: 10.1161/ATVBAHA.120.314595

  • 10

    PreshawPMAlbaALHerreraDJepsenSKonstantinidisAMakrilakisKet al. Periodontitis and diabetes: a two-way relationship. Diabetologia. (2012) 55:21−31. doi: 10.1007/s00125-011-2342-y

  • 11

    Navarro-FloresECauliO. Quality of life in individuals with diabetic foot syndrome. Endocr Metab Immune Disord Drug Targets. (2020) 20:1365−72. doi: 10.2174/1871530320666200128154036

  • 12

    SimpsonTCClarksonJEWorthingtonHVMacDonaldLWeldonJCNeedlemanIet al. Treatment of periodontitis for glycemic control in people with diabetes mellitus. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. (2022) 4:CD004714. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD004714.pub4

  • 13

    JosephJJDeedwaniaPAcharyaTAguilarDBhattDLChyunDAet al. Comprehensive management of cardiovascular risk factors for adults with type 2 diabetes: A scientific statement from the american heart association. Circulation. (2022) 145:e722−59. doi: 10.1161/CIR.0000000000001040

  • 14

    TeoEHassanNTamWKohS. Effectiveness of continuous glucose monitoring in maintaining glycemic control among people with type 1 diabetes mellitus: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials and meta-analysis. Diabetologia. (2022) 65:604−19. doi: 10.1007/s00125-021-05648-4

  • 15

    CorteyARenesmeLRaignouxJBeduACasperCTourneuxPet al. Management of jaundice in the newborn≥35 GW: From screening to follow-up after discharge. Guidelines for clinical practice. Arch Pediatr Organe Off Soc Francaise Pediatr. (2017) 24:192−203. doi: 10.1016/j.arcped.2016.11.011

  • 16

    GeoffroyPASchroderCMReynaudEBourginP. Efficacy of light therapy versus antidepressant drugs, and of the combination versus monotherapy, in major depressive episodes: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Sleep Med Rev déc. (2019) 48:101213. doi: 10.1016/j.smrv.2019.101213

  • 17

    MesterESzendeBSpiryTScherA. Stimulation of wound healing by laser rays. Acta Chir Acad Sci Hung. (1972) 13:315−24.

  • 18

    MesterESzendeBGärtnerP. The effect of laser beams on the growth of hair in mice. Radiobiol Radiother (Berl). (1968) 9:621−6.

  • 19

    CotlerHB. A NASA discovery has current applications in orthopedics. Curr Orthop Pract. (2015) 26:72. doi: 10.1097/BCO.0000000000000196

  • 20

    HeiskanenVHamblinMR. Photobiomodulation: lasers vs. light emitting diodes? Photochem Photobiol Sci Off J Eur Photochem Assoc Eur Soc Photobiol. (2018) 17:1003−17. doi: 10.1039/c8pp00176f

  • 21

    GlassGE. Photobiomodulation: A review of the molecular evidence for low level light therapy. J Plast Reconstr Aesthetic Surg JPRAS. (2021) 74:1050−60. doi: 10.1016/j.bjps.2020.12.059

  • 22

    DesmetKDPazDACorryJJEellsJTWong-RileyMTTHenryMMet al. Clinical and experimental applications of NIR-LED photobiomodulation. Photomed Laser Surg. (2006) 24:121−8. doi: 10.1089/pho.2006.24.121

  • 23

    PastoreDGrecoMPassarellaS. Specific helium-neon laser sensitivity of the purified cytochrome c oxidase. Int J Radiat Biol. (2000) 76:863−70. doi: 10.1080/09553000050029020

  • 24

    HamblinMR. Mechanisms and applications of the anti-inflammatory effects of photobiomodulation. AIMS Biophys. (2017) 4:337−61. doi: 10.3934/biophy.2017.3.337

  • 25

    DompeCMoncrieffLMatysJGrzech-LeśniakKKocherovaIBryjaAet al. Photobiomodulation-underlying mechanism and clinical applications. J Clin Med. (2020) 9:1724. doi: 10.3390/jcm9061724

  • 26

    ZeinRSeltingWHamblinMR. Review of light parameters and photobiomodulation efficacy: dive into complexity. J BioMed Opt. (2018) 23:1−17. doi: 10.1117/1.JBO.23.12.120901

  • 27

    Home - clinicalTrials.gov (2023). Available at: https://clinicaltrials.gov/.

  • 28

    HarklessLBDeLellisSCarnegieDHBurkeTJ. Improved foot sensitivity and pain reduction in patients with peripheral neuropathy after treatment with monochromatic infrared photo energy–MIRE. J Diabetes Complications. (2006) 20:81−7. doi: 10.1016/j.jdiacomp.2005.06.002

  • 29

    DeLellisSLCarnegieDHBurkeTJ. Improved sensitivity in patients with peripheral neuropathy: effects of monochromatic infrared photo energy. J Am Podiatr Med Assoc. (2005) 95:143−7. doi: 10.7547/0950143

  • 30

    KochmanABCarnegieDHBurkeTJ. Symptomatic reversal of peripheral neuropathy in patients with diabetes. J Am Podiatr Med Assoc. (2002) 92:125−30. doi: 10.7547/87507315-92-3-125

  • 31

    AnjoMUmmerVSMaiyaAGHandeMBVS. Effect of photobiomodulation on serum neuron specific enolase (NSE) among patients with diabetic peripheral neuropathy - A pilot study. Diabetes Metab Syndr. (2020) 14:1061−3. doi: 10.1016/j.dsx.2020.06.065

  • 32

    AnjuMChackoLChettupalliYMaiyaAGSaleena UmmerV. Effect of Low Level Laser Therapy on serum vitamin D and magnesium levels in patients with diabetic peripheral neuropathy - A pilot study. Diabetes Metab Syndr. (2019) 13:1087−91. doi: 10.1016/j.dsx.2019.01.022

  • 33

    YamanyAASayedHM. Effect of low level laser therapy on neurovascular function of diabetic peripheral neuropathy. J Adv Res. (2012) 3:21−8. doi: 10.1016/j.jare.2011.02.009

  • 34

    KamathamSAChavaVK. Comparison of salivary calprotectin levels in periodontitis associated with diabetes mellitus after low-level laser therapy as an adjunct to scaling and root planning: A randomized clinical trial. J Indian Soc Periodontol. (2022) 26:143−50. doi: 10.4103/jisp.jisp_149_21

  • 35

    PulivarthiPChavaVKGunupatiS. Salivary tumor necrosis factor-alpha levels in periodontitis associated with diabetes mellitus after low level laser therapy as an adjunct to scaling and root planning: A randomized clinical trial. J Indian Soc Periodontol. (2022) 26:236−44. doi: 10.4103/jisp.jisp_150_21

  • 36

    KocakESağlamMArslanUKayisSAKebapcilarLLoosBGet al. Effect of diode laser application as an adjunct to nonsurgical periodontal therapy on the reduction of red complex microorganisms in type 2 diabetics with chronic periodontitis. Lasers Med Sci. (2020) 35:1403−10. doi: 10.1007/s10103-020-02997-1

  • 37

    KoçakESağlamMKayışSADündarNKebapçılarLLoosBGet al. Nonsurgical periodontal therapy with/without diode laser modulates metabolic control of type 2 diabetics with periodontitis: a randomized clinical trial. Lasers Med Sci. (2016) 31:343−53. doi: 10.1007/s10103-016-1868-0

  • 38

    ObradovićRKesićLMihailovićDAntićSJovanovićGPetrovićAet al. A histological evaluation of a low-level laser therapy as an adjunct to periodontal therapy in patients with diabetes mellitus. Lasers Med Sci. (2013) 28:19−24. doi: 10.1007/s10103-012-1058-7

  • 39

    ObradovićRKesićLMihailovićDJovanovićGAntićSBrkićZ. Low-level lasers as an adjunct in periodontal therapy in patients with diabetes mellitus. Diabetes Technol Ther. (2012) 14:799−803. doi: 10.1089/dia.2012.0027

  • 40

    ObradovićRKesićLJovanovićGPetrovićDGoranRMihailovićD. Low power laser efficacy in the therapy of inflamed gingive in diabetics with parodontopathy. Vojnosanit Pregl. (2011) 68:684−9. doi: 10.2298/VSP1108684O

  • 41

    de OliveiraARda SilvaFSBortolinRHMarques DE daSRamosGVMarquetiRCet al. Effect of photobiomodulation and exercise on early remodeling of the Achilles tendon in streptozotocin-induced diabetic rats. PloS One. (2019) 14:e0211643. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0211643

  • 42

    LinaresSNBeltrameTGaldinoGAMFradeMCMMilan-MattosJCGoisMOet al. Dose response effect of photobiomodulation on hemodynamic responses and glucose levels in men with type 2 diabetes: A randomized, crossover, double-blind, sham-controlled trial. Photonics. juill. (2022) 9:481. doi: 10.3390/photonics9070481

  • 43

    Milan-MattosJCde Oliveira FranciscoCFerroli-FabrícioAMMinatelVMarcondesACAPortaAet al. Acute effect of photobiomodulation using light-emitting diodes (LEDs) on baroreflex sensitivity during and after constant loading exercise in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. Lasers Med Sci. (2020) 35:329−36. doi: 10.1007/s10103-019-02815-3

  • 44

    da Silva LealMVLimaMONicolauRAde CarvallhoTMTAbreu JA deCPessoaDRet al. Effect of modified laser transcutaneous irradiation on pain and quality of life in patients with diabetic neuropathy. Photobiomodulation Photomed Laser Surg. (2020) 38:138−44. doi: 10.1089/photob.2019.4714

  • 45

    de Alencar Fonseca SantosJCampeloMBDde OliveiraRANicolauRARezendeVEAArisawaEÂL. Effects of low-power light therapy on the tissue repair process of chronic wounds in diabetic feet. Photomed Laser Surg. (2018) 36:298−304. doi: 10.1089/pho.2018.4455

  • 46

    SchindlAHeinzeGSchindlMPernerstorfer-SchönHSchindlL. Systemic effects of low-intensity laser irradiation on skin microcirculation in patients with diabetic microangiopathy. Microvasc Res. (2002) 64:240−6. doi: 10.1006/mvre.2002.2429

  • 47

    SchindlMKerschanKSchindlASchönHHeinzlHSchindlL. Induction of complete wound healing in recalcitrant ulcers by low-intensity laser irradiation depends on ulcer cause and size. Photodermatol Photoimmunol Photomed. (1999) 15:18−21. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0781.1999.tb00047.x

  • 48

    SchindlASchindlMSchönHKnoblerRHavelecLSchindlL. Low-intensity laser irradiation improves skin circulation in patients with diabetic microangiopathy. Diabetes Care. (1998) 21:580−4. doi: 10.2337/diacare.21.4.580

  • 49

    VieiraWFMalangeKFde MagalhãesSFLemesJBPDos SantosGGNishijimaCMet al. Anti-hyperalgesic effects of photobiomodulation therapy (904 nm) on streptozotocin-induced diabetic neuropathy imply MAPK pathway and calcium dynamics modulation. Sci Rep. (2022) 12:16730. doi: 10.1038/s41598-022-19947-2

  • 50

    RochaIRCPerez-ReyesEChacurM. Effect of photobiomodulation on mitochondrial dynamics in peripheral nervous system in streptozotocin-induced type 1 diabetes in rats. Photochem Photobiol Sci Off J Eur Photochem Assoc Eur Soc Photobiol. (2021) 20:293−301. doi: 10.1007/s43630-021-00018-w

  • 51

    VieiraWFde MagalhãesSFFariasFHde ThomazAAParadaCA. Raman spectroscopy of dorsal root ganglia from streptozotocin-induced diabetic neuropathic rats submitted to photobiomodulation therapy. J Biophotonics. nov. (2019) 12:e201900135. doi: 10.1002/jbio.201900135

  • 52

    Abdel-WahhabKGDaoudEMEl GendyAMouradHHMannaaFASaberMM. Efficiencies of low-level laser therapy (LLLT) and gabapentin in the management of peripheral neuropathy: diabetic neuropathy. Appl Biochem Biotechnol. (2018) 186:161−73. doi: 10.1007/s12010-018-2729-z

  • 53

    da Silva OliveiraVRCuryDPYamashitaLBEstecaMVWatanabeISBergmannYFet al. Photobiomodulation induces antinociception, recovers structural aspects and regulates mitochondrial homeostasis in peripheral nerve of diabetic mice. J Biophotonics. (2018) 11:e201800110. doi: 10.1002/jbio.201800110

  • 54

    RastogiAUppulaPSaikiaUBhansaliA. Effect of monochromatic infrared energy on quality of life and intraepidermal nerve fiber density in painful diabetic neuropathy: A randomized, sham control study. Neurol India. (2021) 69:1331−7. doi: 10.4103/0028-3886.329614

  • 55

    CgSKMaiyaAGHandeHMVidyasagarSRaoKRajagopalKV. Efficacy of low level laser therapy on painful diabetic peripheral neuropathy. Laser Ther. (2015) 24:195−200. doi: 10.5978/islsm.15-OR-12

  • 56

    BashiriH. Evaluation of low level laser therapy in reducing diabetic polyneuropathy related pain and sensorimotor disorders. Acta Med Iran. (2013) 51:543−7.

  • 57

    KhamsehMEKazemikhoNAghiliRForoughBLajevardiMHashem DabaghianFet al. Diabetic distal symmetric polyneuropathy: effect of low-intensity laser therapy. Lasers Med Sci. (2011) 26:831−5. doi: 10.1007/s10103-011-0977-z

  • 58

    SwislockiAOrthMBalesMWeisshauptJWestCEdringtonJet al. A randomized clinical trial of the effectiveness of photon stimulation on pain, sensation, and quality of life in patients with diabetic peripheral neuropathy. J Pain Symptom Manage. (2010) 39:88−99. doi: 10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2009.05.021

  • 59

    LaveryLAMurdochDPWilliamsJLaveryDC. Does anodyne light therapy improve peripheral neuropathy in diabetes? A double-blind, sham-controlled, randomized trial to evaluate monochromatic infrared photoenergy. Diabetes Care. (2008) 31:316−21. doi: 10.2337/dc07-1794

  • 60

    ArnallDANelsonAGLópezLSanzNIversenLSanzIet al. The restorative effects of pulsed infrared light therapy on significant loss of peripheral protective sensation in patients with long-term type 1 and type 2 diabetes mellitus. Acta Diabetol. (2006) 43:26−33. doi: 10.1007/s00592-006-0207-5

  • 61

    ClifftJKKasserRJNewtonTSBushAJ. The effect of monochromatic infrared energy on sensation in patients with diabetic peripheral neuropathy: a double-blind, placebo-controlled study. Diabetes Care. (2005) 28:2896−900. doi: 10.2337/diacare.28.12.2896

  • 62

    LeonardDRFarooqiMHMyersS. Restoration of sensation, reduced pain, and improved balance in subjects with diabetic peripheral neuropathy: a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled study with monochromatic near-infrared treatment. Diabetes Care. (2004) 27:168−72. doi: 10.2337/diacare.27.1.168

  • 63

    ZinmanLHNgoMNgETNweKTGogovSBrilV. Low-intensity laser therapy for painful symptoms of diabetic sensorimotor polyneuropathy: a controlled trial. Diabetes Care. (2004) 27:921−4. doi: 10.2337/diacare.27.4.921

  • 64

    AhmedSAGhoneimDFMorsyMEHassanAAMahmoudARH. Low-level laser therapy with 670 nm alleviates diabetic retinopathy in an experimental model. J Curr Ophthalmol. (2021) 33:143−51. doi: 10.4103/JOCO.JOCO_29_20

  • 65

    ChengYDuYLiuHTangJVeenstraAKernTS. Photobiomodulation inhibits long-term structural and functional lesions of diabetic retinopathy. Diabetes. (2018) 67:291−8. doi: 10.2337/db17-0803

  • 66

    SalibaADuYLiuHPatelSRobertsRBerkowitzBAet al. Photobiomodulation mitigates diabetes-induced retinopathy by direct and indirect mechanisms: evidence from intervention studies in pigmented mice. PloS One. (2015) 10:e0139003. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0139003

  • 67

    TangJDuYLeeCATalahalliREellsJTKernTS. Low-intensity far-red light inhibits early lesions that contribute to diabetic retinopathy: in vivo and in vitro. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. (2013) 54:3681−90. doi: 10.1167/iovs.12-11018

  • 68

    ShenWTeoKYCWoodJPMVazeAChidlowGAoJet al. Preclinical and clinical studies of photobiomodulation therapy for macular oedema. Diabetologia. (2020) 63:1900−15. doi: 10.1007/s00125-020-05189-2

  • 69

    EellsJTGopalakrishnanSConnorTBStepienKCarrollJWilliamsVet al. 670 nm photobiomodulation as a therapy for diabetic macular edema: A pilot study. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. (2017) 58:932.

  • 70

    MinSHKwonJDoEJKimSHKimESJeongJYet al. Duodenal dual-wavelength photobiomodulation improves hyperglycemia and hepatic parameters with alteration of gut microbiome in type 2 diabetes animal model. Cells. (2022) 11:3490. doi: 10.3390/cells11213490

  • 71

    BonifacioMBenfatoIDde Almeida CruzMde SalesDCPandolfoILQuintanaHTet al. Effects of photobiomodulation on glucose homeostasis and morphometric parameters in pancreatic islets of diabetic mice. Lasers Med Sci. (2022) 37:1799−809. doi: 10.1007/s10103-021-03434-7

  • 72

    GongLZouZLiuLGuoSXingD. Photobiomodulation therapy ameliorates hyperglycemia and insulin resistance by activating cytochrome c oxidase-mediated protein kinase B in muscle. Aging. (2021) 13:10015−33. doi: 10.18632/aging.v13i7

  • 73

    GongLZouZHuangLGuoSXingD. Photobiomodulation therapy decreases free fatty acid generation and release in adipocytes to ameliorate insulin resistance in type 2 diabetes. Cell Signal. (2020) 67:109491. doi: 10.1016/j.cellsig.2019.109491

  • 74

    GuoSGongLShenQXingD. Photobiomodulation reduces hepatic lipogenesis and enhances insulin sensitivity through activation of CaMKKβ/AMPK signaling pathway. J Photochem Photobiol B. (2020) 213:112075. doi: 10.1016/j.jphotobiol.2020.112075

  • 75

    HsuYHChenYCChenYWChiuTHKuoYTChenCH. Far-infrared radiation prevents decline in β-cell mass and function in diabetic mice via the mitochondria-mediated Sirtuin1 pathway. Metabolism. (2020) 104:154143. doi: 10.1016/j.metabol.2020.154143

  • 76

    SilvaGFerraresiCde AlmeidaRTMottaMLPaixãoTOttoneVOet al. Insulin resistance is improved in high-fat fed mice by photobiomodulation therapy at 630 nm. J Biophotonics. mars. (2020) 13:e201960140. doi: 10.1002/jbio.201960140

  • 77

    SilvaGFerraresiCde AlmeidaRTMottaMLPaixãoTOttoneVOet al. Infrared photobiomodulation (PBM) therapy improves glucose metabolism and intracellular insulin pathway in adipose tissue of high-fat fed mice. Lasers Med Sci. (2018) 33:559−71. doi: 10.1007/s10103-017-2408-2

  • 78

    YoshimuraTMSabinoCPRibeiroMS. Photobiomodulation reduces abdominal adipose tissue inflammatory infiltrate of diet-induced obese and hyperglycemic mice. J Biophotonics. (2016) 9:1255−62. doi: 10.1002/jbio.201600088

  • 79

    ScontriCMCBde Castro MagalhãesFDamianiAPMHamblinMRZamunérARFerraresiC. Dose and time-response effect of photobiomodulation therapy on glycemic control in type 2 diabetic patients combined or not with hypoglycemic medicine: a randomized, crossover, double-blind, sham controlled trial. J Biophotonics. (2023) 16:e202300083. doi: 10.1002/jbio.202300083

  • 80

    da Silva TonettoLda SilvaCCFGonzattiNGuexCGHartmannDDBoschiESet al. Effects of photobiomodulation on oxidative stress in rats with type 2 diabetes mellitus. Lasers Med Sci. (2023) 38:90. doi: 10.1007/s10103-023-03745-x

  • 81

    FrigeroMDos SantosSASerraAJDos Santos Monteiro MaChadoCPortesLATucciPJFet al. Effect of photobiomodulation therapy on oxidative stress markers of gastrocnemius muscle of diabetic rats subjected to high-intensity exercise. Lasers Med Sci. (2018) 33:1781−90. doi: 10.1007/s10103-018-2540-7

  • 82

    GobbiAde CarvalhoGSapaloATde Jesus GuirroRR. Acute application of photobiomodulation does not bring important gains for the muscular performance and functionality of diabetic individuals. Lasers Med Sci. (2021) 36:995−1002. doi: 10.1007/s10103-020-03135-7

  • 83

    Francisco C deOBeltrameTHughsonRLMilan-MattosJCFerroli-FabricioAMGalvão BenzeBet al. Effects of light-emitting diode therapy (LEDT) on cardiopulmonary and hemodynamic adjustments during aerobic exercise and glucose levels in patients with diabetes mellitus: A randomized, crossover, double-blind and placebo-controlled clinical trial. Complement Ther Med. (2019) 42:178−83. doi: 10.1016/j.ctim.2018.11.015

  • 84

    DungelPSutaloSSlezakCKeiblCSchädlBSchnidarHet al. Wavelength-dependent effects of photobiomodulation for wound care in diabetic wounds. Int J Mol Sci. (2023) 24:5895. doi: 10.3390/ijms24065895

  • 85

    Ebrahimpour-MalekshahRAminiAMostafaviniaAAhmadiHZareFSafajuSet al. The stereological, immunohistological, and gene expression studies in an infected ischemic wound in diabetic rats treated by human adipose-derived stem cells and photobiomodulation. Arch Dermatol Res. (2023) 1717–34. doi: 10.1007/s00403-023-02563-z

  • 86

    MehrvarSMostaghimiSFoomaniFHAbroeBEellsJTGopalakrishnanSet al. 670 nm photobiomodulation improves the mitochondrial redox state of diabetic wounds. Quant Imaging Med Surg. (2021) 11:107−18. doi: 10.21037/qims

  • 87

    AhmadiHAminiAFadaei FathabadyFMostafaviniaAZareFEbrahimpour-MalekshahRet al. Transplantation of photobiomodulation-preconditioned diabetic stem cells accelerates ischemic wound healing in diabetic rats. Stem Cell Res Ther. (2020) 11:494. doi: 10.1186/s13287-020-01967-2

  • 88

    BagheriMMostafaviniaAAbdollahifarMAAminiAGhoreishiSKChienSet al. Combined effects of metformin and photobiomodulation improve the proliferation phase of wound healing in type 2 diabetic rats. BioMed Pharmacother Biomedecine Pharmacother. (2020) 123:109776. doi: 10.1016/j.biopha.2019.109776

  • 89

    KouhkheilRFridoniMAbdollhifarMAAminiABayatSGhoreishiSKet al. Impact of photobiomodulation and condition medium on mast cell counts, degranulation, and wound strength in infected skin wound healing of diabetic rats. Photobiomodulation Photomed Laser Surg. (2019) 37:706−14. doi: 10.1089/photob.2019.4691

  • 90

    FekrazadRSarrafzadehAKalhoriKAMKhanIAranyPRGiubellinoA. Improved wound remodeling correlates with modulated TGF-beta expression in skin diabetic wounds following combined red and infrared photobiomodulation treatments. Photochem Photobiol. (2018) 94:775−9. doi: 10.1111/php.12914

  • 91

    AsghariMKanonisabetASafakhahMAzimzadehZMostafaviniaATaheriSet al. The effect of combined photobiomodulation and metformin on open skin wound healing in a non-genetic model of type II diabetes. J Photochem Photobiol B. (2017) 169:63−9. doi: 10.1016/j.jphotobiol.2017.03.002

  • 92

    Leite G dePMFdas NevesLMSSilvaCAGuirro RR deJde SouzaTRde SouzaAKet al. Photobiomodulation laser and pulsed electrical field increase the viability of the musculocutaneous flap in diabetic rats. Lasers Med Sci. (2017) 32:641−8. doi: 10.1007/s10103-017-2160-7

  • 93

    FahimipourFHoushmandBAlemiPAsnaashariMTaftiMAAkhoundikharanaghFet al. The effect of He-Ne and Ga-Al-As lasers on the healing of oral mucosa in diabetic mice. J Photochem Photobiol B. (2016) 159:149−54. doi: 10.1016/j.jphotobiol.2016.03.020

  • 94

    FekrazadRMirmoezziAKalhoriKAAranyP. The effect of red, green and blue lasers on healing of oral wounds in diabetic rats. J Photochem Photobiol B. (2015) 148:242−5. doi: 10.1016/j.jphotobiol.2015.04.018

  • 95

    DancákováLVasilenkoTKováčIJakubčováKHollýMRevajováVet al. Low-level laser therapy with 810 nm wavelength improves skin wound healing in rats with streptozotocin-induced diabetes. Photomed Laser Surg. (2014) 32:198−204. doi: 10.1089/pho.2013.3586

  • 96

    Aparecida Da SilvaALeal-JuniorECPAlvesACARamboCSDos SantosSAVieiraRPet al. Wound-healing effects of low-level laser therapy in diabetic rats involve the modulation of MMP-2 and MMP-9 and the redistribution of collagen types I and III. J Cosmet Laser Ther Off Publ Eur Soc Laser Dermatol. (2013) 15:210−6. doi: 10.3109/14764172.2012.761345

  • 97

    FathabadieFFBayatMAminiABayatMRezaieF. Effects of pulsed infra-red low level-laser irradiation on mast cells number and degranulation in open skin wound healing of healthy and streptozotocin-induced diabetic rats. J Cosmet Laser Ther Off Publ Eur Soc Laser Dermatol. (2013) 15:294−304. doi: 10.3109/14764172.2013.764435

  • 98

    FiratETDağAGünayAKayaBKaradedeKanayBEet al. The effects of low-level laser therapy on palatal mucoperiosteal wound healing and oxidative stress status in experimental diabetic rats. Photomed Laser Surg. (2013) 31:315−21. doi: 10.1089/pho.2012.3406

  • 99

    DadpayMSharifianZBayatMBayatMDabbaghA. Effects of pulsed infra-red low level-laser irradiation on open skin wound healing of healthy and streptozotocin-induced diabetic rats by biomechanical evaluation. J Photochem Photobiol B. (2012) 111:1−8. doi: 10.1016/j.jphotobiol.2012.03.001

  • 100

    ParkJJKangKL. Effect of 980-nm GaAlAs diode laser irradiation on healing of extraction sockets in streptozotocin-induced diabetic rats: a pilot study. Lasers Med Sci. (2012) 27:223−30. doi: 10.1007/s10103-011-0944-8

  • 101

    HegdeVNPrabhuVRaoSBSChandraSKumarPSatyamoorthyKet al. Effect of laser dose and treatment schedule on excision wound healing in diabetic mice. Photochem Photobiol. (2011) 87:1433−41. doi: 10.1111/j.1751-1097.2011.00991.x

  • 102

    PeplowPVChungTYRyanBBaxterGD. Laser photobiostimulation of wound healing: reciprocity of irradiance and exposure time on energy density for splinted wounds in diabetic mice. Lasers Surg Med. (2011) 43:843−50. doi: 10.1002/lsm.21094

  • 103

    CarvalhoPTCdeSilvaISReisFAPerreiraDMAydosRD. Influence of ingaalp laser (660nm) on the healing of skin wounds in diabetic rats. Acta Cir Bras. (2010) 25:71−9. doi: 10.1590/S0102-86502010000100016

  • 104

    AkyolUGüngörmüşM. The effect of low-level laser therapy on healing of skin incisions made using a diode laser in diabetic rats. Photomed Laser Surg. (2010) 28:51−5. doi: 10.1089/pho.2008.2425

  • 105

    ChungTYPeplowPVBaxterGD. Laser photobiostimulation of wound healing: defining a dose response for splinted wounds in diabetic mice. Lasers Surg Med. (2010) 42:656−64. doi: 10.1002/lsm.20981

  • 106

    SantosNRSdos SantosJNdos ReisJAOliveiraPCde SousaAPCde CarvalhoCMet al. Influence of the use of laser phototherapy (lambda660 or 790 nm) on the survival of cutaneous flaps on diabetic rats. Photomed Laser Surg. (2010) 28:483−8. doi: 10.1089/pho.2009.2500

  • 107

    Al-WatbanFAH. Laser therapy converts diabetic wound healing to normal healing. Photomed Laser Surg. (2009) 27:127−35. doi: 10.1089/pho.2008.2406

  • 108

    GüngörmüşMAkyolUK. Effect of biostimulation on wound healing in diabetic rats. Photomed Laser Surg. (2009) 27:607−10. doi: 10.1089/pho.2008.2349

  • 109

    MaiyaAGKumarPNayakS. Photo-stimulatory effect of low energy helium-neon laser irradiation on excisional diabetic wound healing dynamics in Wistar rats. Indian J Dermatol. (2009) 54:323−9. doi: 10.4103/0019-5154.57606

  • 110

    CarvalhoPdeTCdeMazzerNdos ReisFABelchiorACGSilvaIS. Analysis of the influence of low-power HeNe laser on the healing of skin wounds in diabetic and non-diabetic rats. Acta Cir Bras. (2006) 21:177−83. doi: 10.1590/S0102-86502006000300010

  • 111

    RabeloSBVillaverdeABNicolauRSalgadoMCMeloMDSPachecoMTT. Comparison between wound healing in induced diabetic and nondiabetic rats after low-level laser therapy. Photomed Laser Surg. (2006) 24:474−9. doi: 10.1089/pho.2006.24.474

  • 112

    MaiyaGAKumarPRaoL. Effect of low intensity helium-neon (He-Ne) laser irradiation on diabetic wound healing dynamics. Photomed Laser Surg. (2005) 23:187−90. doi: 10.1089/pho.2005.23.187

  • 113

    ByrnesKRBarnaLChenaultVMWaynantRWIlevIKLongoLet al. Photobiomodulation improves cutaneous wound healing in an animal model of type II diabetes. Photomed Laser Surg. (2004) 22:281−90. doi: 10.1089/1549541041797977

  • 114

    ReddyGKStehno-BittelLEnwemekaCS. Laser photostimulation accelerates wound healing in diabetic rats. Wound Repair Regener Off Publ Wound Heal Soc Eur Tissue Repair Soc. (2001) 9:248−55. doi: 10.1046/j.1524-475x.2001.00248.x

  • 115

    HazeAGavishLElishoovOShorkaDTsoharTGellmanYNet al. Treatment of diabetic foot ulcers in a frail population with severe co-morbidities using at-home photobiomodulation laser therapy: a double-blind, randomized, sham-controlled pilot clinical study. Lasers Med Sci. (2022) 37:919−28. doi: 10.1007/s10103-021-03335-9

  • 116

    VitorianoNAMMont’AlverneDGBMartinsMISSilvaPSMartinsCATeixeiraHDet al. Comparative study on laser and LED influence on tissue repair and improvement of neuropathic symptoms during the treatment of diabetic ulcers. Lasers Med Sci. (2019) 34:1365−71. doi: 10.1007/s10103-019-02724-5

  • 117

    FrangežINizič-KosTFrangežHB. Phototherapy with LED shows promising results in healing chronic wounds in diabetes mellitus patients: A prospective randomized double-blind study. Photomed Laser Surg. (2018) 36:377−82. doi: 10.1089/pho.2017.4382

  • 118

    RuhACFrigoLCavalcantiMFXBSvidnickiPVicariVNLopes-MartinsRABet al. Laser photobiomodulation in pressure ulcer healing of human diabetic patients: gene expression analysis of inflammatory biochemical markers. Lasers Med Sci. (2018) 33:165−71. doi: 10.1007/s10103-017-2384-6

  • 119

    MathurRKSahuKSarafSPathejaPKhanFGuptaPK. Low-level laser therapy as an adjunct to conventional therapy in the treatment of diabetic foot ulcers. Lasers Med Sci. (2017) 32:275−82. doi: 10.1007/s10103-016-2109-2

  • 120

    CarvalhoAFMdeFeitosaMCPCoelho NPM deFRebêloVCNCastroJGdeSousaPRGdeet al. Low-level laser therapy and Calendula officinalis in repairing diabetic foot ulcers. Rev Esc Enferm U P. (2016) 50:628−34. doi: 10.1590/S0080-623420160000500013

  • 121

    Sandoval OrtízMCHerrera VillabonaECamargo LemosDMCastellanosR. Effects of low level laser therapy and high voltage stimulation on diabetic wound healing. Rev Univ Ind Santander Salud. (2014) 46:107−17.

  • 122

    KajagarBMGodhiASPanditAKhatriS. Efficacy of low level laser therapy on wound healing in patients with chronic diabetic foot ulcers-a randomized control trial. Indian J Surg. (2012) 74:359−63. doi: 10.1007/s12262-011-0393-4

  • 123

    KavianiADjavidGEAtaie-FashtamiLFatehMGhodsiMSalamiMet al. A randomized clinical trial on the effect of low-level laser therapy on chronic diabetic foot wound healing: a preliminary report. Photomed Laser Surg. (2011) 29:109−14. doi: 10.1089/pho.2009.2680

  • 124

    MinatelDGFradeMACFrançaSCEnwemekaCS. Phototherapy promotes healing of chronic diabetic leg ulcers that failed to respond to other therapies. Lasers Surg Med. (2009) 41:433−41. doi: 10.1002/lsm.20789

  • 125

    DalirsaniZGhaziNDelavarianZPakfetratAEsmailyHDavajiMet al. Effects of diode low-level laser therapy on healing of tooth extraction sockets: a histopathological study in diabetic rats. Lasers Med Sci. (2021) 36:1527−34. doi: 10.1007/s10103-021-03270-9

  • 126

    LeeJHKongSCChenCHLinYCLeeKTWangYH. The effects of photobiomodulation on bone defect repairing in a diabetic rat model. Int J Mol Sci. (2021) 22:11026. doi: 10.3390/ijms222011026

  • 127

    DikerNAytacDHelvaciogluFDagdelenCOguzY. Evaluation of the effects of low-level laser therapy on diabetic bone healing. J Craniofac Surg. (2019) 30:1994−8. doi: 10.1097/SCS.0000000000005654

  • 128

    GomesMFGoulart M daGVGiannasiLCHiraokaCMMelo G deFSZangaroRAet al. Effects of the photobiomodulation using different energy densities on the periodontal tissues under orthodontic force in rats with type 2 diabetes mellitus. Braz Oral Res. (2018) 32:e61. doi: 10.1590/1807-3107bor-2018.vol32.0061

  • 129

    MostafaviniaAMasteri FarahaniRAbdollahifarMAGhatrehsamaniMGhoreishiSKHajihossainlouBet al. Evaluation of the effects of photobiomodulation on partial osteotomy in streptozotocin-induced diabetes in rats. Photomed Laser Surg. (2018) 36:406−14. doi: 10.1089/pho.2018.4438

  • 130

    MostafaviniaARazaviSAbdollahifarMAminiAGhorishiSKRezaeiFet al. Evaluation of the effects of photobiomodulation on bone healing in healthy and streptozotocin-induced diabetes in rats. Photomed Laser Surg. (2017) 35:537−45. doi: 10.1089/pho.2016.4224

  • 131

    YildirimturkSSirinYSoluk TekkesinMGurlerGFiratD. The effects of low-level laser therapy on the healing of bone defects in streptozotocin-induced diabetic rats: A histological and morphometric evaluation. J Cosmet Laser Ther Off Publ Eur Soc Laser Dermatol. (2017) 19:397−403. doi: 10.1080/14764172.2017.1341048

  • 132

    Patrocínio-SilvaTLSouzaAMFdeGoulartRLPegorariCFOliveiraJRFernandesKRet al. Low-level laser therapy associated to a resistance training protocol on bone tissue in diabetic rats. Arch Endocrinol Metab. Arch Endocrinol Metab. (2016) 60:457−64. doi: 10.1590/2359-3997000000190

  • 133

    MagriAMPFernandesKRAssisLMendesNAda Silva SantosALYde Oliveira DantasEet al. Photobiomodulation and bone healing in diabetic rats: evaluation of bone response using a tibial defect experimental model. Lasers Med Sci. (2015) 30:1949−57. doi: 10.1007/s10103-015-1789-3

  • 134

    NascimentoMFdoAlmeidaBMdeCunhaJLSValoisRBVPinheiroJCRibeiroMAGet al. Improvement of bone repair in diabetic rats subjected to ƛ780 nm low-level laser therapy. Acta Cir Bras. (2015) 30:660−7. doi: 10.1590/S0102-865020150100000002

  • 135

    Patrocínio-SilvaTLde SouzaAMFGoulartRLPegorariCFOliveiraJRFernandesKet al. The effects of low-level laser irradiation on bone tissue in diabetic rats. Lasers Med Sci. (2014) 29:1357−64. doi: 10.1007/s10103-013-1418-y

  • 136

    AkyolUKGüngörmüşM. Effect of biostimulation on healing of bone defects in diabetic rats. Photomed Laser Surg. (2010), 28411−6. doi: 10.1089/pho.2008.2478

  • 137

    AbdiSBayatMJavadiehFMohsenifarZRezaieFBayatM. The effects of helium-neon light therapy on healing of partial osteotomy of the tibia in streptozotocin induced diabetic rats. Photomed Laser Surg. (2009) 27:907−12. doi: 10.1089/pho.2008.2421

  • 138

    BayatMAbdiSJavadiehFMohsenifarZRashidMR. The effects of low-level laser therapy on bone in diabetic and nondiabetic rats. Photomed Laser Surg. (2009) 27:703−8. doi: 10.1089/pho.2008.2351

  • 139

    JavadiehFBayatMAbdiSMohsenifarZRaziS. The effects of infrared low-level laser therapy on healing of partial osteotomy of tibia in streptozotocin-induced diabetic rats. Photomed Laser Surg. (2009) 27:641−6. doi: 10.1089/pho.2008.2370

  • 140

    AttiaMSElewaGMAbdelgawadNIsmailRMHassan EidMGhoneimMM. The influence of low-level laser therapy on CBCT radiographic and biochemical profiles of type II controlled diabetic patients after dental implant insertion: A randomized case-control study. Cureus. mars. (2023) 15:e36559. doi: 10.7759/cureus.36559

  • 141

    MrasoriSPopovskaMRusevskaBShkretaMSelaniABunjakuV. Effects of low level laser therapy (LLLT) on serum values of interleukin 6 (IL-6) in patients with periodontitis and type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). Acta Inform Med AIM J Soc Med Inform Bosnia Herzeg Cas Drustva Za Med Inform BiH. (2021) 29:59−64. doi: 10.5455/aim.

  • 142

    SoiSBainsVKSrivastavaRMadanR. Comparative evaluation of improvement in periodontal and glycemic health status of type 2 diabetes mellitus patients after scaling and root planing with or without adjunctive use of diode laser. Lasers Med Sci. (2021) 36:1307−15. doi: 10.1007/s10103-021-03261-w

  • 143

    ÖzberkSSGündoğarHÖzkayaMTanerİLErciyasK. The effect of photobiomodulation therapy on nonsurgical periodontal treatment in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: a randomized controlled, single-blind, split-mouth clinical trial. Lasers Med Sci. (2020) 35:497−504. doi: 10.1007/s10103-019-02897-z

  • 144

    Castro Dos SantosNAndereNMRBMiguelMMVDos SantosLMSantamariaMMathiasIFet al. Photobiomodulation for the treatment of periodontal pockets in patients with type 2 diabetes: 1-year results of a randomized clinical trial. Lasers Med Sci. (2019) 34:1897−904. doi: 10.1007/s10103-019-02799-0

  • 145

    ChandraSShashikumarP. Diode laser - A novel therapeutic approach in the treatment of chronic periodontitis in type 2 diabetes mellitus patients: A prospective randomized controlled clinical trial. J Lasers Med Sci. (2019) 10:56−63. doi: 10.15171/jlms.2019.09

  • 146

    Dengizek EltasSGurselMEltasAAlptekinNOAtaogluT. Evaluation of long-term effects of diode laser application in periodontal treatment of poorly controlled type 2 diabetic patients with chronic periodontitis. Int J Dent Hyg. (2019) 17:292−9. doi: 10.1111/idh.12384

  • 147

    LiFXuHS. Effects of low level laser combined with basic periodontal therapy on cytokines and LPS, leptin in gingival crevicular fluid of diabetes mellitus complicated with chronic periodontitis patients. Shanghai Kou Qiang Yi Xue Shanghai J Stomatol. (2018) 27:637−40.

  • 148

    Demirturk-GocgunOBaserUAykol-SahinGDinccagNIsseverHYalcinF. Role of low-level laser therapy as an adjunct to initial periodontal treatment in type 2 diabetic patients: A split-mouth, randomized, controlled clinical trial. Photomed Laser Surg. (2017) 35:111−5. doi: 10.1089/pho.2016.4117

  • 149

    JavedFAl AmriMDAl-KheraifAAQadriTAhmedAGhanemAet al. Efficacy of non-surgical periodontal therapy with adjunct Nd : YAG laser therapy in the treatment of periodontal inflammation among patients with and without type 2 diabetes mellitus: A short-term pilot study. J Photochem Photobiol B. (2015) 149:230−4. doi: 10.1016/j.jphotobiol.2015.06.013

  • 150

    LoeHSilnessJ. Periodontal disease in pregnancy. i. prevalence and severity. Acta Odontol Scand. (1963) 21:533−51.

  • 151

    SilnessJLoeH. Periodontal disease in pregnancy. ii. correlation between oral hygiene and periodontal condtion. Acta Odontol Scand. (1964) 22:121−35.

  • 152

    YangLLiuGJiangDLinGRenZFanHet al. Effect of near-infrared laser treatment on improving erectile function in rats with diabetes mellitus. Andrology. (2023) 1472–83. doi: 10.1111/andr.13422

  • 153

    AsghariATakhtfooladiMAHoseinzadehHA. Effect of photobiomodulation on ischemia/reperfusion-induced renal damage in diabetic rats. Lasers Med Sci. (2016) 31:1943−8. doi: 10.1007/s10103-016-2073-x

  • 154

    AghamohamdiDFakhariSFarhoudiMFarzinH. The efficacy of low-level laser therapy in the treatment of bell’s palsy in diabetic patients. J Lasers Med Sci. (2020) 11:310−5. doi: 10.34172/jlms.2020.52

  • 155

    HodeL. The importance of the coherency. Photomed Laser Surg. (2005) 23:431−4. doi: 10.1089/pho.2005.23.431

  • 156

    ZalevskyZBelkinM. Coherence and speckle in photomedicine and photobiology. Photomed Laser Surg. (2011) 29:655−6. doi: 10.1089/pho.2010.2939

  • 157

    de FreitasLFHamblinMR. Proposed mechanisms of photobiomodulation or low-level light therapy. IEEE J Sel Top Quantum Electron Publ IEEE Lasers Electro-Opt Soc. (2016) 22:7000417. doi: 10.1109/JSTQE.2016.2561201

  • 158

    DeanaNFZarorCDel SolMBagnatoVSAlvesN. Wound contraction rate in excised and unexcised burn wounds with laser photobiomodulation: Systematic review and meta-analysis of preclinical studies. Burns J Int Soc Burn Inj. (2023) 49:261−74. doi: 10.1016/j.burns.2022.05.009

  • 159

    Lopes C deCALimirioJPJOZanattaLSASimamotoVRNDechichiPLimirioAPHJO. Effectiveness of photobiomodulation therapy on human bone healing in dentistry: A systematic review. Photobiomodulation photomed laser surg. Photobiomodul Photomed Laser Surg. (2022) 40:440−53. doi: 10.1089/photob.2021.0092

  • 160

    EbrahimiPHadilouMNaserneysariFDolatabadiATarzemanyRVahedNet al. Effect of photobiomodulation in secondary intention gingival wound healing-a systematic review and meta-analysis. BMC Oral Health. (2021) 21:258. doi: 10.1186/s12903-021-01611-2

  • 161

    RibuLBirkelandKHanestadBRMoumTRustoenT. A longitudinal study of patients with diabetes and foot ulcers and their health-related quality of life: wound healing and quality-of-life changes. J Diabetes Complications. (2008) 22:400−7. doi: 10.1016/j.jdiacomp.2007.06.006

  • 162

    AyukSMHoureldNNAbrahamseH. Effect of 660 nm visible red light on cell proliferation and viability in diabetic models in vitro under stressed conditions. Lasers Med Sci. (2018) 33:1085−93. doi: 10.1007/s10103-017-2432-2

  • 163

    De MarchiTFerlitoJVFerlitoMVSalvadorMLeal-JuniorECP. Can photobiomodulation therapy (PBMT) minimize exercise-induced oxidative stress? A systematic review and meta-analysis. Antioxid Basel Switz. 27 août. (2022) 11:1671. doi: 10.3390/antiox11091671

  • 164

    FerraresiC. Use of photobiomodulation therapy in exercise performance enhancement and postexercise recovery: true or myth? Photobiomodulation Photomed Laser Surg. (2020) 38:705−7. doi: 10.1089/photob.2020.4948

  • 165

    LiebmanCLoyaSLawrenceMBashooNChoM. Stimulatory responses in α- and β-cells by near-infrared (810 nm) photobiomodulation. J Biophotonics. (2022) 15:e202100257. doi: 10.1002/jbio.202100257

  • 166

    IraniSMohseni Salehi MonfaredSSAkbari-KamraniMOstadSNAbdollahiMLarijaniB. Effect of low-level laser irradiation on in vitro function of pancreatic islets. Transplant Proc. (2009) 41:4313−5. doi: 10.1016/j.transproceed.2009.09.065

  • 167

    HuangHHStillmanTJBranhamLAWilliamsSC. The effects of photobiomodulation therapy on porcine islet insulin secretion. Photobiomodulation Photomed Laser Surg. (2022) 40:395−401. doi: 10.1089/photob.2022.0022

Summary

Keywords

photobiomodulation, diabetes, neuropathy, wound healing, periodontitis, retinopathy, glycemic control

Citation

Perrier Q, Moro C and Lablanche S (2024) Diabetes in spotlight: current knowledge and perspectives of photobiomodulation utilization. Front. Endocrinol. 15:1303638. doi: 10.3389/fendo.2024.1303638

Received

28 September 2023

Accepted

26 February 2024

Published

19 March 2024

Volume

15 - 2024

Edited by

Maurizio Delvecchio, University of L’Aquila, Italy

Reviewed by

Yuzhen Wang, People’s Liberation Army General Hospital, China

Maria Guadalupe Moreno Treviño, University of Monterrey, Mexico

Updates

Copyright

*Correspondence: Quentin Perrier,

Disclaimer

All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

Outline

Figures

Cite article

Copy to clipboard


Export citation file


Share article

Article metrics