4.4 Review

Could Light-Based Technologies Improve Stem Cell Therapy for Skin Wounds? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Preclinical Studies

Journal

PHOTOCHEMISTRY AND PHOTOBIOLOGY
Volume 99, Issue 2, Pages 519-528

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/php.13702

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This article systematically reviews the impact of combining stem cell and photobiomodulation therapy (PBM) in the repair of skin wounds. The meta-analysis shows that the combination of SCs and PBM has a positive influence on wound closure and strength, although there is heterogeneity and bias in the included studies.
Several diseases or conditions cause dermatological disorders that hinder the process of skin repair. The search for novel technologies has inspired the combination of stem cell (SC) and light-based therapies to ameliorate skin wound repair. Herein, we systematically revised the impact of photobiomodulation therapy (PBM) combined with SCs in animal models of skin wounds and quantitatively evaluated this effect through a meta-analysis. For inclusion, SCs should be irradiated in vitro or in vivo, before or after being implanted in animals, respectively. The search resulted in nine eligible articles, which were assessed for risk of bias. For the meta-analysis, studies were included only when PBM was applied in vivo, five regarding wound closure, and three to wound strength. Overall, a positive influence of SC + PBM on wound closure (mean difference: 9.69; 95% CI: 5.78-13.61, P < 0.00001) and strength (standardized mean difference: 1.7, 95% CI: 0.68-2.72, P = 0.001) was detected, although studies have shown moderate to high heterogeneity and a lack of information regarding some bias domains. Altogether, PBM seems to be an enabling technology able to be applied postimplantation of SCs for cutaneous regeneration. Our findings may guide future laboratory and clinical studies in hopes of offering wound care patients a better quality of life.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available