Bragato Erick Frank, Paisano Adriana Fernandes, Pavani Christiane, Motta Lara Jansiski, Varellis Maria Lucia Zarvos, Chiedde Marcela, da Silva Gabriel Arruda, Bussadori Sandra Kalil, Mesquita-Ferrari Raquel Agnelli, Fernandes Kristianne Porta Santos
Biophotonics Medicine Postgraduate program, Universidade Nove de Julho, São Paulo, Brazil.
Conjunto Hospitalar do Mandaqui, Conjunto Hospitalar do Mandaqui, Brazil.
Lasers Med Sci. 2025 Apr 1;40(1):170. doi: 10.1007/s10103-025-04383-1.
The present study investigated the effects of different photobiomodulation application frequencies on facial rejuvenation. Ninety-five women 45 to 60 years of age participated in the study. A red LED mask (660 ± 10 nm, 6.4 mW/cm², 8.05 J/cm², 5.02 mW, 21 min) was used, with the analysis of two different time intervals between applications. Group 1 received three weekly applications and Group 2 received two weekly applications for four weeks (total: 12 and eight sessions, respectively). The control group received sham photobiomodulation twice per week for four weeks. The participants were unaware of the allocation to the different groups. Three standardized photographs were taken before and after treatments for assessment using the Wrinkle Assessment Scale (WAS) by three specialists blinded to the allocation and period of the photograph. The Image J software was used by a researcher blinded to allocation and period of the photograph to measure wrinkles in the forehead, glabellar as well as right and left periorbital regions. Patient satisfaction was determined using the FACE-Q questionnaire. The data were analyzed statistically with the significance level set at 5% (p < 0.05). No significant differences among the groups were found with regards to the WAS. In the ImageJ assessment, significant reductions were found in the length of the glabellar and right periorbital wrinkles in the groups treated with photobiomodulation compared to the control group (p < 0.001). Participant satisfaction rates using FACE-Q were 79.6% and 73.4% in Groups 1 and 2, respectively, with significant differences in comparison to the control group (p = 0.001 and p = 0.034, respectively). The quantity of PBM sessions did not significantly alter the positive results achieved in terms of the satisfaction of the participants with their facial esthetics or the photographic assessments performed 30 days after treatment. Thus, two weekly sessions seem to be sufficient for improving patient satisfaction.
本研究调查了不同光生物调节应用频率对面部年轻化的影响。95名45至60岁的女性参与了该研究。使用了红色LED面罩（660±10nm，6.4mW/cm²，8.05J/cm²，5.02mW，21分钟），并分析了两次应用之间的两种不同时间间隔。第1组每周接受三次应用，第2组每周接受两次应用，共四周（分别为12次和8次疗程）。对照组每周接受两次假光生物调节，共四周。参与者不知道自己被分配到不同的组。治疗前后拍摄三张标准化照片，由三名对照片的分配和拍摄时间不知情的专家使用皱纹评估量表（WAS）进行评估。一名对照片的分配和拍摄时间不知情的研究人员使用Image J软件测量前额、眉间以及左右眶周区域的皱纹。使用FACE-Q问卷确定患者满意度。数据进行统计学分析，显著性水平设定为5%（p<0.05）。在WAS方面，各组之间未发现显著差异。在ImageJ评估中，与对照组相比，接受光生物调节治疗的组眉间和右眶周皱纹长度显著减少（p<0.001）。使用FACE-Q的参与者满意度在第1组和第2组分别为79.6%和73.4%，与对照组相比有显著差异（分别为p=0.001和p=0.034）。光生物调节疗程的数量并没有显著改变参与者对面部美学的满意度或治疗后30天进行的照片评估所取得的积极结果。因此，每周两次疗程似乎足以提高患者满意度。
