Huang Z, Chen J, Ma J, Shen B, Pei F, Kraus V B
Department of Orthopedic Surgery, West China Hospital, West China Medical School, SiChuan University, ChengDu, SiChuan Province, People's Republic of China.
Duke Molecular Physiology Institute, Duke University School of Medicine, Duke University, Durham, NC, United States.
Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 2015 Sep;23(9):1437-1444. doi: 10.1016/j.joca.2015.04.005. Epub 2015 Apr 23.
To investigate the efficacy of low-level laser therapy (LLLT) treatment of knee osteoarthritis (KOA) by a systematic literature search with meta-analyses on selected studies.
MEDLINE, EMBASE, ISI Web of Science and Cochrane Library were systematically searched from January 2000 to November 2014. Included studies were randomized controlled trials (RCTs) written in English that compared LLLT (at least eight treatment sessions) with sham laser in KOA patients. The efficacy effective size was estimated by the standardized mean difference (SMD). Standard fixed or random-effects meta-analysis was used, and inconsistency was evaluated by the I-squared index (I(2)).
Of 612 studies, nine RCTs (seven double-blind, two single-blind, totaling 518 patients) met the criteria for inclusion. Based on seven studies, the SMD in visual analog scale (VAS) pain score right after therapy (RAT) (within 2 weeks after the therapy) was not significantly different between LLLT and control (SMD = -0.28 [95% CI = -0.66, 0.10], I(2) = 66%). No significant difference was identified in studies conforming to the World Association of Laser Therapy (WALT) recommendations (four studies) or on the basis of OA severity. There was no significant difference in the delayed response (12 weeks after end of therapy) between LLLT and control in VAS pain (five studies). Similarly, there was no evidence of LLLT effectiveness based on Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index (WOMAC) pain, stiffness or function outcomes (five and three studies had outcome data right after and 12 weeks after therapy respectively).
Our findings indicate that the best available current evidence does not support the effectiveness of LLLT as a therapy for patients with KOA.
通过对选定研究进行系统文献检索和荟萃分析,探讨低强度激光疗法(LLLT)治疗膝关节骨关节炎(KOA)的疗效。
对2000年1月至2014年11月期间的MEDLINE、EMBASE、ISI科学网和考克兰图书馆进行系统检索。纳入的研究为用英文撰写的随机对照试验(RCT),比较了KOA患者接受LLLT(至少8次治疗疗程)与假激光治疗的效果。通过标准化均数差(SMD)估计疗效效应量。采用标准固定效应或随机效应荟萃分析,并通过I²指数(I(2))评估异质性。
在612项研究中,9项RCT(7项双盲、2项单盲,共518例患者)符合纳入标准。基于7项研究,治疗后即刻(RAT,治疗后2周内)视觉模拟量表(VAS)疼痛评分的SMD在LLLT组和对照组之间无显著差异(SMD = -0.28 [95%CI = -0.66, 0.10],I(2) = 66%)。在符合世界激光治疗协会(WALT)建议的研究(4项研究)中或根据骨关节炎严重程度分析,均未发现显著差异。在VAS疼痛方面,治疗结束后12周的延迟反应在LLLT组和对照组之间无显著差异(5项研究)。同样,基于西安大略和麦克马斯特大学骨关节炎指数(WOMAC)疼痛、僵硬或功能结局,也没有证据表明LLLT有效(分别有5项和3项研究在治疗后即刻和治疗后12周有结局数据)。
我们的研究结果表明,目前可得的最佳证据不支持LLLT作为KOA患者治疗方法的有效性。