Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Dankook University Hospital, Cheonan, Chungnam, Republic of Korea.
Department of Medical Laser, Graduate School of Medicine, Dankook University, Cheonan, Chungnam, Republic of Korea.
PLoS One. 2024 Aug 23;19(8):e0305616. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0305616. eCollection 2024.
The management of pressure ulcers (PUs) poses challenges due to their chronic nature and the lack of established conservative treatment methods. In this clinical trial, our objective was to examine the validity and safety of using a light-emitting diode device contained four wavelengths in the treatment of grade 2 sacral PUs.
A total of 38 patients were randomly assigned to two groups: sham device (Sham) and experimental device (LED) group. The treatment sessions were conducted over a period of four weeks, with a frequency of three times per week. The study was conducted in a double-blinded manner. The study assessed the primary validity by measuring wound size and re-epithelialization after 0 and 4 weeks. Secondary evaluations included epidermal regeneration, collagen density, and immunological markers. Safety was evaluated by monitoring adverse reactions throughout the trial.
The presence of eschar was found to have a significant impact on wound healing. Sham consisted of 15 wounds without eschar, while LED had nine. After treatment in without eschar situation, the post-treatment size of wounds in Sham was 13.80 ± 20.29%, while it was 3.52 ± 6.68% in LED. However, there was no significant difference (p = 0.070). And analysis of epidermal thickness showed a significant increase in LED (495.62 ± 327.09 μm) compared to Sham (195.36 ± 263.04 μm) (p < 0.0001).
While LED treatment had a potential for wound reduction in PUs without eschar, we could not uncover evidence to support the efficacy of LED treatment in grade 2 PUs.
由于压力性溃疡(PU)具有慢性特征且缺乏既定的保守治疗方法,因此其管理颇具挑战。在这项临床试验中,我们旨在检验使用包含四种波长的发光二极管设备治疗 2 级骶骨 PUs 的有效性和安全性。
共有 38 名患者被随机分配到两组:假设备(Sham)和实验设备(LED)组。治疗疗程为四周,每周三次。研究采用双盲法进行。研究通过在 0 周和 4 周后测量伤口大小和再上皮化来评估主要有效性。次要评估包括表皮再生、胶原密度和免疫标志物。通过监测整个试验过程中的不良反应来评估安全性。
发现焦痂的存在对伤口愈合有显著影响。Sham 组有 15 个无焦痂的伤口,而 LED 组有 9 个。在无焦痂情况下进行治疗后,Sham 组的治疗后伤口大小为 13.80 ± 20.29%,而 LED 组为 3.52 ± 6.68%。但差异无统计学意义(p = 0.070)。表皮厚度分析显示 LED 组显著增加(495.62 ± 327.09 μm),而 Sham 组增加(195.36 ± 263.04 μm)(p < 0.0001)。
虽然 LED 治疗对无焦痂的 PUs 具有减少伤口的潜力,但我们无法发现证据支持 LED 治疗 2 级 PUs 的疗效。