Musculoskeletal Evidence does not support a benefit in
delayed-onset muscle soreness. It may be useful for muscle pain and injuries. A 2008
Cochrane Library review concluded that LLLT has insufficient evidence for treatment of nonspecific
low back pain, a finding echoed in a 2010 review of chronic low back pain. A 2015 review found benefit in nonspecific chronic low-back pain. In a study testing the efficacy of low-level laser therapy treating
plantar fasciitis found that LLLT significantly reduces pain in lower extremity tendinopathy and plantar fasciitis in the short and medium terms. The same study also stated that while comparing the effect of LLLT to that of therapeutic
ultrasound in persons with
patellar tendinopathy, and they found a statistically significant effect in favor of LLLT, both on pain reduction and function. The findings indicate that the differences between utilizing a sham and an infrared laser may be negligible or nonexistent in terms of pain, stiffness in the morning, grip strength, functional ability, inflammation, range of motion, disease activity, and side events. It was also discovered that the data about the effects of laser acupuncture against
reflexology in terms of functional ability, quality of life, and inflammation is quite hazy, and about the effects of red laser versus sham in terms of pain, morning stiffness, and side events. There is tentative evidence of benefit in
tendinopathy. A 2014
Cochrane review found tentative evidence that it may help in
frozen shoulder.
Mouth Similarly, the use of lasers to treat
chronic periodontitis and to speed healing of
infections around dental implants is suggested, but there is insufficient evidence to indicate a use superior to traditional practices. There is tentative evidence for dentin hypersensitivity. It does not appear to be useful for orthodontic pain. LLLT might be useful for wisdom tooth extraction (complications).
Hair loss LLLT has been studied as a treatment for
hair loss; a review in 2012 found little evidence to support the use of lasers to treat hair loss. A 2014 review found tentative evidence for benefit for lasers, while another 2014 review concluded that the results were mixed, had a high risk of bias, and that its effectiveness was unclear. A 2015 review found tentative evidence of benefit. Additionally, a 2017 review of clinical trials found 10 of 11 trials reviewed "demonstrated significant improvement of androgenic alopecia in comparison to baseline or controls when treated with LLLT." LLLT is shown to increase hair density and growth in both genders. The types of devices (hat, comb, helmet) and duration did not alter the effectiveness, with more emphasis to be placed on lasers compared to LEDs. Ultraviolet and infrared light are more effective for alopecia areata, while red light and infrared light is more effective for androgenetic alopecia. Medical reviews suggest that LLLT is as effective or potentially more than other non invasive and traditional therapies such as
minoxidil and
finasteride but further studies such as RCTs, long term follow up studies, and larger double blinded trials need to be conducted to confirm the initial findings.
Brain injuries LLLT has been studied for
traumatic brain injury (TBI) and
stroke among other conditions.
Stem cells An ongoing area of research is the application of LLLT for increasing cell proliferation, including
stem cells.
Wound healing Low level laser therapy has been studied as a potential treatment for
chronic wounds, and higher-power lasers have sometimes been successfully used to close acute wounds as an alternative to
stitching. However, and due to inconsistent results and the low quality of extant research, reviews in the scientific literature have not supported its widespread application. == See also ==