Skip to main content
Download PDF

Photobiomodulation combination therapy as a new insight in neurological disorders: a comprehensive systematic review

BMC Neurology volume 24, Article number: 101 (2024) Cite this article

A Correction to this article was published on 10 April 2024

This article has been updated

Abstract

Preclinical and clinical studies have indicated that combining photobiomodulation (PBM) therapy with other therapeutic approaches may influence the treatment process in a variety of disorders. The purpose of this systematic review was to determine whether PBM-combined therapy provides additional benefits over monotherapies in neurologic and neuropsychiatric disorders. In addition, the review describes the most commonly used methods and PBM parameters in these conjunctional approaches.

To accomplish this, a systematic search was conducted in Google Scholar, PubMed, and Scopus databases through January 2024. 95 potentially eligible articles on PBM-combined treatment strategies for neurological and neuropsychological disorders were identified, including 29 preclinical studies and 66 clinical trials.

According to the findings, seven major categories of studies were identified based on disease type: neuropsychiatric diseases, neurodegenerative diseases, ischemia, nerve injury, pain, paresis, and neuropathy. These studies looked at the effects of laser therapy in combination with other therapies like pharmacotherapies, physical therapies, exercises, stem cells, and experimental materials on neurological disorders in both animal models and humans. The findings suggested that most combination therapies could produce synergistic effects, leading to better outcomes for treating neurologic and psychiatric disorders and relieving symptoms.

These findings indicate that the combination of PBM may be a useful adjunct to conventional and experimental treatments for a variety of neurological and psychological disorders.

Peer Review reports

Introduction

Neurological disorders cause the majority of disability and are the second leading cause of death worldwide. Over the last three decades, the total number of deaths and disabilities caused by neurological diseases has increased significantly, particularly in low- and middle-income countries [1]. Congenital defects, epigenetic changes, aging, and environmental health issues are the primary causes of the onset and progression of various neurological disorders, which affect both the central and peripheral nervous systems (CNS and PNS) [2,3,4].

Photobiomodulation (PBM) is a non-invasive physical treatment modality that uses low-level lasers (from the red to near-infrared spectrum, with intensities ranging from 1–500 mW) and/or light-emitting diodes (LEDs) [5]. Evidence suggests that PBM could boost mitochondrial function by improving the electron transfer chain and increasing adenosine triphosphate (ATP) synthesis, as well as lowering oxidative stress biomarkers and inhibiting neuroinflammation [6]. PBM has been used to treat a variety of CNS and PNS disorders, including traumatic brain injury [7], stroke [8], Parkinson’s disease (PD) [9], Alzheimer’s disease (AD) [10], depression, anxiety, cognitive impairments [11, 12], spinal cord injury [13], and carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS) [14]. Both preclinical and clinical studies have shown that PBM therapy improves CNS function [15, 16] and effectively inhibits inflammation in peripheral nerves [17].

Currently, numerous PBM clinics and medical device manufacturers are actively working to improve the parameters that influence PBM effectiveness in the treatment of neurological disorders [18]. The safety of this technique was evaluated in three large randomized clinical trials on acute stroke, known as the "NeuroThera Effectiveness and Safety Trials" (NEST-1, NEST-2, and NEST-3), which found no adverse effects [19,20,21]. While there have been numerous peer-reviewed articles on PBM, there are few standard RCTs to definitively determine the clinical efficacy of this therapeutic approach [22].

There are some important gaps in the field of PBM therapy that must be addressed. Optimizing neural tissue stimulation with this technique is one of the most difficult challenges, due to the diverse types and severity of neuropathologies, as well as the rapid attenuation of light transmission in tissue [23, 24]. Combination therapies have been proposed as a way to increase treatment efficacy while avoiding severe side effects. As a result, current experimental and clinical studies concentrate on combination therapy rather than single therapy, indicating potential future clinical combination treatment schedules.

Although several systematic reviews have examined the effects of PBM on various neurological disorders [13, 14, 24, 25], we were unable to locate a comprehensive systematic review on PBM combination therapy in neurologic and neuropsychiatric disorders. This review aims to provide an overview of published procedures for determining whether combination therapies for CNS and PNS disorders are more effective than monotherapies. To that end, PBM-based methodologies were tested for detecting and treating neurologic and neuropsychiatric disorders such as depression, anxiety, Alzheimer's disease, Parkinson's disease, stroke, traumatic brain injury, neuropathic pain, spinal cord injury, sciatic nerve crush, paresis, and facial nerve injury. Furthermore, the parameters involved in these procedures were evaluated.

Methods

Search strategy

According to the PRISMA (Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines, the findings of this review were reported. The Google Scholar, PubMed, and Scopus databases, as international electronic databases, were independently searched up to January 2024 to retrieve all types of studies primarily focused on the synergistic and complementary effects of PBM-combined strategies in the treatment of neurologic and neuropsychiatric disorders. The following keyword combinations based on MeSH terms were used: Photobiomodulation; PBM; Low-Level Laser Therapy; LLLT; Low-Level Light Therapy; Light-Emitting Diode; LED; Combine; Central Nervous System; CNS; Peripheral Nervous System; PNS; Neuropsychiatric; Neurodegenerative; Paresis; Neuropathy; Ischemia; Nerve Injury; pain. The search strategy is presented in Appendix 1. Before selection, duplicate citations were eliminated using the Endnote software. Two independent investigators scrutinized all titles, abstracts, and full texts of potentially qualified articles based on the eligibility criteria, and any discrepancies were resolved by the analysis of a third independent author and the majority consent was taken. Moreover, the reference lists from each article were checked through hand searching to find articles that the search strategy could not have found.

Study selection and data extraction

Following the search, all English-language published original articles on animal studies and clinical trials were included. The exclusion criteria were in vitro (i.e., cell culture) studies, literature reviews, case reports, protocol studies, conference abstracts, non-English articles, duplicate studies with the same ethical approval number, studies on a combination of two or more lasers at different wavelengths, and acupuncture lasers.

To clarify the relevant details from each included article, data and information from each study were extracted and tabulated as follows: author name and publication year, disease category, species (sex and age), type of combination therapy, laser properties (wavelength, energy density), duration of treatment, and key outcomes. Due to the high variability in the type of disease and treatment meta-analysis was not performed.

Study quality

The Cochrane Collaboration tool was utilized to evaluate the risk of bias (RoB) in randomized controlled clinical trials. This tool consists of several components including selection bias, performance bias, detection bias, attrition bias, and reporting bias. Animal studies were scored based on a modified version of the CAMARADES’ study quality checklist. The CAMARADES checklist is a reliable and commonly used tool that offers mentoring to those who conduct systematic reviews and meta-analyses of data from preclinical literature [26, 27]. The questions in this tool covers information about publication in a peer-reviewed journal, control of temperature, random allocation to treatment or control, blinded induction, blinding of outcome assessment, use of anesthetic without significant intrinsic neuroprotective activity, animal model, sample-size calculation, compliance with animal welfare regulations, and a statement regarding possible conflicts of interest.

The assessment was conducted by two independent authors. The authors were familiar with both the methodological issues and the topic area. They also had previous experience of working with the tools. There was an explicit procedure for resolving disagreements among authors. All disagreements were resolved by comparing supporting information from each study report, which was divided into two parts of the data collection process (rechecking the document) and a difference in interpretation (resolved via discussion). Unresolved discrepancies were resolved after consulting with a third senior author [28, 29].

Result

Literature search

The electronic search of the mentioned databases (Google Scholar (n = 200), PubMed (8475) and Scopus (10273)), resulted in a total of (18948) studies. After removing duplicated papers (n = 8382) and conducting the appraisal process, 117 studies remained for full-text reading. Among these studies, three were excluded because they were conducted in cell culture. Studies that used combined lasers at different wavelengths were also excluded (n = 7). Additionally, eight case reports and four protocol studies were excluded. The PRISMA flowchart of the review selection process is illustrated in Fig. 1.

Fig. 1
figure 1

The PRISMA flowchart of the review selection process

Full size image

The results yielded 95 studies, which assessed the efficacy of strategies on behavioral and molecular changes in neurological disorders.

The included studies in the first step were divided into two major categories: clinical (human, n = 66) and pre-clinical (animal, n = 29) studies. Clinical studies were further classified into two main groups including CNS and PNS disorders. The first group was re-classified into neuropsychiatric disorders (n = 6), neurodegenerative diseases (n = 5), ischemia (n = 7), and nerve injury (n = 19). The second group contained pain (n = 48), paresis (n = 3), and neuropathy (n = 7). Tables 1 and 2 provide the main characteristics of the included studies outcomes, light source parameters and combination treatments, in central and peripheral nervous system disorders in clinical studies. Since the re-categorizing preclinical studies was not possible due to limitations in the number of articles in each possible section, they were reported in a holistic manner. Table 3 represents the similar data from experimental studies. All included articles addressed the impacts of laser therapy combined with other therapies on neurological disorders.

Table 1 Characteristics of the included studies outcomes, light source parameters and combination treatment, in central nervous system disorders in clinical studies
Full size table
Table 2 Characteristics of the included studies outcomes, light source parameters and combination treatment, in peripheral nervous system disorders in clinical studies
Full size table
Table 3 Characteristics of the included studies outcomes, light source parameters and combination treatment, in experimental studies
Full size table

Study characteristics

The wavelength, power/energy density (irradiance and fluence), mode of application (pulsed wave or continuous wave), and treatment frequency were the most important factors affecting the outcomes. Red to far-infrared lasers at a range of wavelengths from 630 to 1875 nm were widely used, as opposed to LEDs and CO2 lasers. The included protocols had an energy density of up to 983 J/cm2. According to the findings of this study, laser therapy was combined with other treatment approaches such as pharmacotherapy, exercise, environmental enrichment, exposure therapy, physiotherapy, ultrasound, mesenchymal stem cells, etc. The duration of treatment varied from 3 days to 18 months. Almost all studies showed positive effects of PBM-combined therapies on various neurological disorders.

Study quality and risk of bias

The Cochrane Collaboration’s tool showed that the majority of CNS studies were not blinded, and the allocation concealment rate was low in these studies. Accordingly, selection, and detection bias were apparent in these studies. The details of the quality assessment are presented in Figs. 2 and 3. The CAMARADES checklist was utilized in the quality assessment of animal studies which showed that almost all studies were qualified (Table 4). All of the articles had been published in peer-reviewed journals and reported details of the animal model, anesthetic use, compliance with animal welfare, and a statement of potential conflicts of interest. Random allocation to groups was reported in 18 (62%) studies. Nine (31%) studies reported blinded induction of the model. Only one study reported a sample size calculation and 10 (34%) studies reported blinded assessment of the outcome.

Fig. 2
figure 2

Risk of bias (RoB) assessment using Cochrane RoB tool (included CNS studies). Left panel shows RoB summary showing each RoB item for each included study. Right panel shows RoB graph showing each RoB item presented as percentages across all included studies. In this color-coded ranking, the green color represents a low RoB and red high RoB

Full size image
Fig. 3
figure 3

Risk of bias (RoB) assessment using Cochrane RoB tool (included PNS studies). Top panel shows RoB summary showing each RoB item for each included study. Bottom panel shows RoB graph showing each RoB item presented as percentages across all included studies. In this color-coded ranking, the green color represents a low RoB and red high RoB

Full size image
Table 4 The methodological quality of individual animal studies using the CAMARADES checklist
Full size table

Discussion

This systematic review sought to assess whether the integration of photobiomodulation (PBM) with other treatment strategies yielded additional advantages in the management of neurological and neuropsychological disorders, as compared to administering these treatments separately.

Central Nervous System (CNS)

Neuropsychiatric disorders

Zaizar et al. [30, 31] showed that the concurrent use of transcranial infrared laser and exposure therapy reduced fear in individuals with pathological fear. The study findings demonstrated that the combination of PBM with a static magnetic field and Pilates, a therapeutic approach for stress incontinence, resulted in enhanced muscle strength and reduced urinary loss [32]. In addition, certain studies have found that the concurrent use of transcranial PBM with pharmaceutical interventions, such as coenzyme Q10 and methylene blue, can reduce anxiety by counteracting oxidative stress, neuroinflammation, and neuronal apoptosis [96, 97]. Furthermore, the concurrent use of transcranial PBM and a stimulating environment has demonstrated a substantial elevation in hippocampal levels of BDNF, TrkB levels, and the p-CREB/CREB ratio, alongside a reduction in depressive behaviors [98].

Neurodegenerative diseases

Arakelyan et al. showed that the combination of low-level laser therapy (LLLT), magnetic field therapy, and light chromotherapy was more effective than using each therapy individually in reducing the deterioration associated with AD [33]. Nevertheless, Moges et al. observed no substantial enhancement in motor function or survival of motor neurons in the anterior horn of the lumbar spinal cord of a transgenic mouse model of familial amyotrophic lateral sclerosis when subjected to a combined laser therapy (810 nm) and riboflavin protocol [99]. Moreover, research has shown that the combination of PBM with exercise has a synergistic impact on mitigating the decline associated with AD [34]. Patients with PD have been found to benefit from combined treatments involving infrared laser and vacuum therapy, as well as molecular hydrogen water treatments. These treatments have been shown to effectively accelerate the relief of disease severity [35, 36].

Ischemia

In their study, Lapchak et al. [100] found that the simultaneous use of transcranial near-infrared laser therapy and thrombolytic therapy did not have any impact on the occurrence or size of hemorrhages in a stroke model induced by embolism [100]. Another research conducted demonstrated that the use of red-light emitting diode irradiation in conjunction with bone marrow mesenchymal stem cell transplantation had a synergistic effect on enhancing the movement of stem cells towards damaged primary neurons. This approach also resulted in improved avoidance memory in a rat model of global cerebral ischemia [101]. Moreover, research has shown that the combined use of PBM and Coenzyme Q10 significantly reduced the negative effects of global cerebral ischemia on spatial and episodic memory, excessive production of reactive oxygen species (ROS), neuroinflammation, and impairments in mitochondrial function and biogenesis in a model of aging induced by d-galactose [102]. A clinical trial study demonstrated that the application of both PBM (comprising laser and LED) and static magnetic field treatment resulted in enhanced functional mobility outcomes in individuals who had experienced a stroke [37]. In a similar vein, Ashrafi et al. found that the concurrent use of pulsed LLLT and an extremely low-frequency electromagnetic field reduced the severity of stroke, enhanced cognitive function, alleviated depression, and mitigated the extent of disability in performing daily tasks among individuals who had suffered a stroke [38]. Other studies have shown that the co-administration of PBM with neuromuscular electrical stimulation or a static magnetic field to patients diagnosed with a stroke resulted in optimal improvements in cognitive function, pain relief, and kinematic variables of the hip in both paretic and non-paretic limbs [39, 40].

Nerve injury

Studies have shown that using a CO2 laser, along with three distinct suture materials and a bovine albumin protein solder, produces favorable initial histological outcomes and aids in the recovery process at the site of nerve repair [103].

Muniz et al. discovered that the combination of LLLT with natural latex protein reduces the severity of muscle wasting after a sciatic nerve injury (SCI) [108]. In addition, Yang et al. found that the combination of LLLT with mesenchymal stem cells had a more significant impact on the functional recovery of a crushed sciatic nerve compared to using either therapy alone [106]. In addition, the combination of PBM with dexamethasone and simvastatin demonstrated superior efficacy compared to individual therapies in enhancing SCI outcomes [109, 111]. In contrast, certain studies have suggested that the use of combination therapy does not result in a synergistic impact on the recovery from SCI [107, 125].

In their study, Souza et al. found that the concurrent application of transdermal monosialoganglioside (GM1) and laser did not result in any notable impact on the functional and neurological outcomes after SCI in rats [112]. Furthermore, the co-administration of PBM along with chondroitinase ABC or meloxicam has demonstrated enhanced functionality in the identical model [113, 114, 116]. Moreover, there have been reports indicating that the combination of LLLT with either human adipose-derived stem cells or human umbilical cord mesenchymal stem cells has proven to be successful in restoring motor function and promoting the regeneration of nerve fibers in rat models of SCI [115, 117]. A recent randomized clinical trial demonstrated that patients with incomplete spinal cord injury experienced improvements in sensory responses, muscle strength, and muscle contraction one month after receiving a combination of PBM and physiotherapy [41].

Peripheral Nervous System (PNS)

Pain

Prior research has shown that the amalgamation of LLLT with Q10 or oxytocin can elevate thresholds in models of neuropathic pain [121, 122]. Moreover, a randomized controlled clinical trial demonstrated that the combination of LLLT and carbamazepine reduced the intensity of pain in individuals suffering from trigeminal neuralgia [43]. Additionally, a separate study found that the combination of LLLT and Gasserian ganglion block can extend the duration of pain relief and decrease the amount of carbamazepine taken by patients with trigeminal neuralgia after treatment [42].

Studies have shown that the use of PBM in conjunction with exercise or ultrasound therapy can alleviate pain, improve shoulder flexion, elbow extension, and handgrip strength in individuals suffering from lateral epicondylitis [44,45,46]. Amanat et al. demonstrated the effectiveness of combining laser therapy with pharmaceutical therapy, including tricyclic antidepressants, anxiolytics, muscle relaxants, and carbamazepine, for treating orofacial pain [47]. In addition, Martins et al. demonstrated that long-term combined therapy with PBM and B complex vitamins effectively reduced pain responses [126].

Administering infrared laser therapy in conjunction with exercise or conventional medical interventions (such as naproxen sodium, fluoxetine, and clonazepam) to individuals suffering from myofascial pain syndrome resulted in decreased pain levels and elevated excretion of serotonin metabolites [48, 49, 51]. Furthermore, the simultaneous application of LLLT and physiotherapy resulted in the alleviation of pain and enhancement of the quality of life in individuals suffering from myofascial pain syndrome [50].

Research has shown that the utilization of both infrared laser treatment and physical exercise can effectively alleviate pain in individuals suffering from chronic low back pain [52,53,54]. Moreover, a clinical trial demonstrated that the use of both hot-pack therapy and two specific wavelengths of low-level laser therapy (850 nm and 650 nm) effectively reduced pain severity and enhanced functionality and range of motion in this particular group [55]. Furthermore, a combined effect on the intensity of pain and the function of the shoulder has been observed when laser therapy is used in conjunction with exercise in individuals diagnosed with subacromial impingement syndrome [60,61,62].

Kolu et al. discovered that a combination of transcutaneous nerve stimulation (TENS), ultrasound, and exercise yielded superior results compared to high-intensity laser therapy combined with a hot pack and exercise. This combination was found to be more effective in reducing pain and improving functionality in patients with chronic lumbar radiculopathy [65]. Moreover, the concurrent use of PBM with a static magnetic field or active electrical stimulation has demonstrated synergistic effects in alleviating pain intensity in individuals suffering from chronic neck pain [127]. Similarly, the effectiveness of LLLT in combination with ultrasound, exercise, or physiotherapy has been reported to exhibit robust synergistic therapeutic effects in treating shoulder tendonitis [57, 58] and tendinopathy [66, 68, 128].

A combination of laser therapy, chiropractic joint manipulation, ozone therapy, or exercise has been shown to effectively improve cervical flexion, lateral flexion, rotation, and pain disability in patients with cervical facet dysfunction, cervical disc herniation, or spondylosis, when compared to using only one of these treatments [69,70,71,72]. Moreover, the application of LLLT and piroxicam has demonstrated favorable outcomes in reducing the intensity of pain in individuals afflicted with temporomandibular joint arthralgia [73].

The utilization of both PBM and manual therapy has been discovered to effectively alleviate pain and jaw impairments, while also enhancing mandibular function in individuals diagnosed with temporomandibular disorders (TMD) [75]. Moreover, multiple studies have utilized a fusion of PBM and ultrasound therapy for TMD treatment. These studies have documented decreases in physical pain and psychological constraints, along with enhancements in quality of life [76,77,78]. Furthermore, a combination therapy of laser therapy and vacuum therapy has been found to result in pain relief and improvement of TMD joint motion [78]. Combining orofacial myofunctional therapy with PBM has demonstrated favorable results, including decreased pain in patients with TMD [129].

Furthermore, recent findings indicate that individuals suffering from fibromyalgia can experience positive outcomes in terms of decreased pain and enhanced psychological well-being, functional ability, and overall quality of life through the use of adjunct PBM therapy and exercise, or a combination of PBM and ultrasound [80,81,82,83]. Furthermore, the combination of laser therapy and ultrasound has been proven to effectively alleviate pain and decrease disability in individuals suffering from osteoarthritis [84].

Gavish et al. found that the efficacy of a combined treatment of LLLT and physiotherapy was superior to physiotherapy alone in managing anterior knee pain in patients. Furthermore, this beneficial effect persisted for a duration of 3 months post-treatment [85].

Paresis

The utilization of both LLLT and stellate ganglion block has demonstrated the ability to expedite the process of recuperation from facial paralysis[86]. Yamada et al. found that the use of both LLLT and corticosteroid therapy had a more significant impact on patients with facial palsy in the early stages of recovery compared to using either therapy alone [87]. The combined use of LLLT and facial exercise treatment has shown synergistic effects in patients with facial paralysis. This therapy has been found to enhance functional facial movements and reduce the time required for recovery [88].

Neuropathy

Combining LLLT with TENS has been shown to reduce pain scores and median nerve sensory latency, alleviate Phalen and Tinel signs, and enhance functionality in individuals with CTS [89]. Furthermore, a clinical trial validated that the utilization of a combination of a high-power laser (808 nm, 6.5 J/cm2) and TENS alleviated the intensity of pain and enhanced hand functionality in patients with CTS [93]. Dincer et al. found that the concurrent use of LLLT and splinting yielded superior results compared to individual therapies in terms of reducing pain scores and enhancing patient satisfaction [90]. Similarly, Fusakul et al. showed that the utilization of LLLT in conjunction with wrist splinting resulted in reduced pain scores, enhanced hand grip strength and pinch strength, and improved the functional status of individuals with CTS [92].

Nevertheless, a study indicated that the utilization of both kinesiotaping and LLLT in CTS did not exhibit superiority over LLLT alone in the immediate term (3 weeks). Over a period of 12 weeks, the combination of therapies yielded greater improvements in hand grip strength and finger pinch strength outcomes compared to individual therapy [94]. Bartkowiak et al. discovered that the use of LLLT at a wavelength of 830 nm and energy density of 9 J/cm2, along with nerve and tendon gliding exercises, significantly reduced sensory disturbances and pain scores in patients with CTS. Additionally, it improved hand grip strength and functionality. However, they found no additional advantage when comparing it to the combination of ultrasound with nerve and tendon gliding exercises [95].

Limitation

For this systematic review, some limitations should be highlighted. The lack of details about the parameters in some studies, hindered the possibility of meticulous evaluations. The heterogeneity in included disorders (CNS and PNS) exacerbated the exact focusing on each (made it difficult to focus on each specific disorder). Moreover, there was a limited number of CNS-related interventions in clinical studies. Also, the variation in combined treatment approaches resulted in a lack of uniformity in the data. The stimulation parameters used for performing PBM in the included disorders were not unified. Parameters such as wavelengths, frequency, pulse width, stimulation target, intensity, duration, and unilateral/bilateral treatment differed between the included studies. Due to these limitations, we could only assess the variety of combinations and the effect of key parameters on reported outcomes in the included studies. Another limitation was the moderate quality of the included studies, as assessed using a risk of bias assessment tool. The majority of studies had a pre-post design, were not randomized and blinded.

Despite the limitations of this systematic review, there were also several strengths that are important to mention. We conducted comprehensive research by including both animal and human studies that focused on PBM-combined methodologies which had not been previously mentioned.

Furthermore, we documented all potential combinations that were examined in prior investigations. Moreover, this systematic review covered a wide range of psychological and neurological disorders which is unique. Additionally, we considered multiple scientific databases, providing an overview that is as complete as possible.

Conclusion

This systematic review clearly demonstrates the therapeutic role of PBM combined therapies, as well as their potential to improve treatment efficacy and reduce side effects across a wide range of central and peripheral neurological disorders. This approach provides numerous research opportunities for studying the synergistic effects of combining PBM with other treatment modalities to optimize neural tissue stimulation by this technique. Also, this review listed the all-possible combinations that studied in previous preclinical and clinical researches. Given the significant heterogeneity in the combined treatment approaches and included disorders, additional studies are required to establish more consistent evidence of efficacy. These studies will provide guidance for the development of well-designed and successful clinical trials.

Availability of data and materials

All data generated or analyzed in this work are included in the published version.

Change history

References

  1. Feigin VL, Vos T, Nichols E, Owolabi MO, Carroll WM, Dichgans M, et al. The global burden of neurological disorders: translating evidence into policy. Lancet Neurol. 2020;19(3):255–65.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Penzes P, Cahill ME, Jones KA, VanLeeuwen J-E, Woolfrey KM. Dendritic spine pathology in neuropsychiatric disorders. Nat Neurosci. 2011;14(3):285–93.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  3. Sanberg PR, Eve DJ, Cruz LE, Borlongan CV. Neurological disorders and the potential role for stem cells as a therapy. Br Med Bull. 2012;101(1):163–81.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  4. Ebrahimi-Fakhari D, Wahlster L, McLean PJ. Protein degradation pathways in Parkinson’s disease: curse or blessing. Acta Neuropathol. 2012;124(2):153–72.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  5. Hamblin MR. Shining light on the head: Photobiomodulation for brain disorders. BBA Clin. 2016;6:113–24.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  6. Passarella S, Karu T. Absorption of monochromatic and narrow band radiation in the visible and near IR by both mitochondrial and non-mitochondrial photoacceptors results in photobiomodulation. J Photochem Photobiol, B. 2014;140:344–58.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Thunshelle C, Hamblin MR. Transcranial low-level laser (light) therapy for brain injury. Photomed Laser Surg. 2016;34(12):587–98.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  8. Hamblin MR. Photobiomodulation for traumatic brain injury and stroke. J Neurosci Res. 2018;96(4):731–43.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Hamilton CL, El Khoury H, Hamilton D, Nicklason F, Mitrofanis J. “Buckets”: early observations on the use of red and infrared light helmets in parkinson’s disease patients. Photobiomodul Photomed Laser Surg. 2019;37(10):615–22.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Hamblin MR, editor Photobiomodulation for Alzheimer’s Disease: Has the Light Dawned? Photonics. 2019;6:77.

  11. Mohammed HS. Transcranial low-level infrared laser irradiation ameliorates depression induced by reserpine in rats. Lasers Med Sci. 2016;31:1651–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Meng C, He Z, Xing D. Low-level laser therapy rescues dendrite atrophy via upregulating BDNF expression: implications for Alzheimer’s disease. J Neurosci. 2013;33(33):13505–17.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  13. Ramezani F, Razmgir M, Tanha K, Nasirinezhad F, Neshastehriz A, Bahrami-Ahmadi A, et al. Photobiomodulation for spinal cord injury: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Physiol Behav. 2020;224:112977.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Bekhet AH, Ragab B, Abushouk AI, Elgebaly A, Ali OI. Efficacy of low-level laser therapy in carpal tunnel syndrome management: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Lasers Med Sci. 2017;32(6):1439–48.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Medalha CC, Di Gangi GC, Barbosa CB, Fernandes M, Aguiar O, Faloppa F, et al. Low-level laser therapy improves repair following complete resection of the sciatic nerve in rats. Lasers Med Sci. 2012;27(3):629–35.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Cotler HB, Chow RT, Hamblin MR, Carroll J. The use of low level laser therapy (LLLT) for musculoskeletal pain. MOJ Orthoped Rheumatol. 2015;2(5):00068.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Chow R, Armati P, Laakso E-L, Bjordal JM, Baxter GD. Inhibitory effects of laser irradiation on peripheral mammalian nerves and relevance to analgesic effects: a systematic review. Photomed Laser Surg. 2011;29(6):365–81.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Shapero BG, Mischoulon D, Cusin C. The massachusetts general hospital guide to depression. Cham: Springer Nature Switzerland AG; 2019.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  19. Lampl Y, Zivin JA, Fisher M, Lew R, Welin L, Dahlof B, et al. Infrared laser therapy for ischemic stroke: a new treatment strategy: results of the NeuroThera Effectiveness And Safety Trial-1 (NEST-1). Stroke. 2007;38(6):1843–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Zivin JA, Albers GW, Bornstein N, Chippendale T, Dahlof B, Devlin T, et al. Effectiveness and safety of transcranial laser therapy for acute ischemic stroke. Stroke. 2009;40(4):1359–64.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Hacke W. Transcranial laser therapy in acute stroke treatment: results of Neurothera effectiveness and safety trial 3, a phase III clinical end point device trial. Stroke. 2014;45(12):E309-E.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Salehpour F, Sadigh-Eteghad S, Mahmoudi J, Kamari F, Cassano P, Hamblin MR. Photobiomodulation for the Brain: Photobiomodulation Therapy in Neurology and Neuropsychiatry. Switzerland: Springer; 2023.

  23. Chamkouri H, Liu Q, Zhang Y, Chen C. Chen LA-O Brain photobiomodulation therapy on neurological and psychological diseases. J Biophotonics. 2024;17:e202300145 (1864-0648 (Electronic)).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Gutiérrez-Menéndez A, Marcos-Nistal M, Méndez M, Arias JL. Photobiomodulation as a promising new tool in the management of psychological disorders: A systematic review. Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 2020;119:242–54 (1873-7528 (Electronic)).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Lee T-l, Ding Z, Chan AS. Can transcranial photobiomodulation improve cognitive function? A systematic review of human studies. Ageing Res Rev. 2023;83:101786.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Krauth D, Woodruff TJ, Bero L. Instruments for assessing risk of bias and other methodological criteria of published animal studies: a systematic review. Environ Health Perspect. 2013;121(9):985–92.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  27. Ma L-L, Wang Y-Y, Yang Z-H, Huang D, Weng H, Zeng X-T. Methodological quality (risk of bias) assessment tools for primary and secondary medical studies: what are they and which is better? Mil Med Res. 2020;7:1–11.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Bertizzolo L, Bossuyt P, Atal I, Ravaud P, Dechartres A. Disagreements in risk of bias assessment for randomised controlled trials included in more than one Cochrane systematic reviews: a research on research study using cross-sectional design. BMJ Open. 2019;9(4):e028382.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  29. Seo H-J, Kim KU. Quality assessment of systematic reviews or meta-analyses of nursing interventions conducted by Korean reviewers. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2012;12:1–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Zaizar ED, Gonzalez-Lima F, Telch MJ. Singular and combined effects of transcranial infrared laser stimulation and exposure therapy: a randomized clinical trial. Contemp Clin Trials. 2018;72:95–102.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Zaizar ED, Papini S, Gonzalez-Lima F, Telch MJ. Singular and combined effects of transcranial infrared laser stimulation and exposure therapy on pathological fear: a randomized clinical trial. Psychol Med. 2023;53(3):908–17.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. De Marchi T, Ferlito JV, Turra AC, Flamia S, de Bispo MF, Pavelecini Donida ML, et al. Pilates method and/or Photobiomodulation therapy combined to static magnetic field in women with stress urinary incontinence: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial. J Clin Med. 2023;12(3):1104.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  33. Arakelyan HS. Treatment of Alzheimer’s disease with a combination of laser, magnetic field and chromo light (colour) therapies: a double-blind controlled trial based on a review and overview of the etiological pathophysiology of Alzheimer’s disease. Laser Ther. 2005;14(1):19–28.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Nagy EN, Ali AY, Behiry ME, Naguib MM, Elsayed MM. Impact of combined photo-biomodulation and aerobic exercise on cognitive function and quality-of-life in elderly Alzheimer patients with anemia: A randomized clinical trial. Int J Gen Med. 2021;14:141–52.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  35. Tamae PE, Santos AVd, Simão MLdS, Canelada ACN, Zampieri KR, Santos TVd, et al. Can the associated use of negative pressure and laser therapy be a new and efficient treatment for Parkinson’s pain?: a comparative study. J Alzheimer’s Dis Parkinsonism. 2020;10(3):1000488–91.

    Google Scholar 

  36. Hong C-T, Hu C-J, Lin H-Y, Wu D. Effects of concomitant use of hydrogen water and photobiomodulation on Parkinson disease: a pilot study. Medicine. 2021;100(4):e24191.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  37. Casalechi HL, Dumont AJL, Ferreira LAB, de Paiva PRV, Machado CdSM, de Carvalho PdTC, et al. Acute effects of photobiomodulation therapy and magnetic field on functional mobility in stroke survivors: a randomized, sham-controlled, triple-blind, crossover, clinical trial. Lasers Med Sci. 2020;35(6):1253–62.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Ashrafi F, Rezaei A, Azhideh A, Tabeie F, Gachkar L, Ahmadi MA, et al. Effectiveness of extremely low frequency electromagnetic field and pulsed low level laser therapy in acute stroke treatment. Int Clin Neurosci J. 2020;7(3):127.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Paolillo FR, Luccas GAA, Parizotto NA, Paolillo AR, Castro Neto JCd, Bagnato VS. The effects of transcranial laser photobiomodulation and neuromuscular electrical stimulation in the treatment of post-stroke dysfunctions. J Biophotonics. 2022;16:e202200260.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Dumont AJL, Casalechi HL, Tomazoni SS, Grecco LC, Galli M, Oliveira CS, et al. Photobiomodulation Therapy Combined with Static Magnetic Field (PBMT–SMF) on Spatiotemporal and kinematics gait parameters in post-stroke: a pilot study. Life. 2022;12(2):186.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  41. da Silva FC, Silva T, Gomes AO, da Costa Palácio PR, Andreo L, Gonçalves MLL, et al. Sensory and motor responses after photobiomodulation associated with physiotherapy in patients with incomplete spinal cord injury: clinical, randomized trial. Lasers Med Sci. 2020;35(8):1751–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Aghamohammadi D, Amirnaseri R, Peirovifar A, Hossainzadeh H, Eidi M, Ehsaei M, et al. Gasserian ganglion block with or without low-intensity laser therapy in trigeminal neuralgia: a comparative study. Neurosurg Q. 2012;22(4):228–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Ebrahimi H, Najafi S, Khayamzadeh M, Zahedi A, Mahdavi A. Therapeutic and analgesic efficacy of laser in conjunction with pharmaceutical therapy for trigeminal neuralgia. J Lasers Med Sci. 2018;9(1):63–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Stergioulas A. Effects of low-level laser and plyometric exercises in the treatment of lateral epicondylitis. Photomed Laser Surg. 2007;25(3):205–13.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Celik D, Anaforoglu Kulunkoglu B. Photobiomodulation therapy versus extracorporeal shock wave therapy in the treatment of lateral epicondylitis. Photobiomodul Photomed Laser Surg. 2019;37(5):269–75.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Ali EM, Fekry O, Obeya HE, Darweesh H, Moharram A. Efficacy of high intensity laser versus ultrasound therapy in the management of patients with lateral epicondylitis. Egyptian Rheumatol. 2021;43(2):119–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Amanat D, Ebrahimi H, Lavaee F, Alipour A. The adjunct therapeutic effect of lasers with medication in the management of orofacial pain: double blind randomized controlled trial. Photomed Laser Surg. 2013;31(10):474–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Ceylan Y, Hizmetli S, Siliğ Y. The effects of infrared laser and medical treatments on pain and serotonin degradation products in patients with myofascial pain syndrome. A controlled trial. Rheumatol Int. 2004;24(5):260–3.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Sumen A, Sarsan A, Alkan H, Yildiz N, Ardic F. Efficacy of low level laser therapy and intramuscular electrical stimulation on myofascial pain syndrome. J Back Musculoskelet Rehabil. 2015;28(1):153–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. El-sharkawy ATM, Ahmad RE-SE-S. Effect of low-level LASER therapy combined with conventional physiotherapy on pain and quality of life in patients with Myofascial pain dysfunction syndrome. Egypt Dental J. 2018;64:3111–23 (4-October (Oral Surgery)).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Mansourian A, Pourshahidi S, Sadrzadeh-Afshar M-S, Ebrahimi H. A comparative study of low-level laser therapy and transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation as an adjunct to pharmaceutical therapy for myofascial pain dysfunction syndrome: a randomized clinical trial. Front Dentistry. 2019;16(4):256.

    Google Scholar 

  52. Gur A, Karakoc M, Cevik R, Nas K, Sarac AJ, Karakoc M. Efficacy of low power laser therapy and exercise on pain and functions in chronic low back pain. Lasers Surg Med. 2003;32(3):233–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Djavid GE, Mehrdad R, Ghasemi M, Hasan-Zadeh H, Sotoodeh-Manesh A, Pouryaghoub G. In chronic low back pain, low level laser therapy combined with exercise is more beneficial than exercise alone in the long term: a randomised trial. Austr J Physiother. 2007;53(3):155–60.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. Ammar TARA. Monochromatic infrared photo energy versus low level laser therapy in chronic low back pain. J Lasers Med Sci. 2015;6(4):157.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  55. Koldaş Doğan Ş, Ay S, Evcik D. The effects of two different low level laser therapies in the treatment of patients with chronic low back pain: a double-blinded randomized clinical trial. J Back Musculoskelet Rehabil. 2017;30(2):235–40.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  56. Mohammad EzzElDien M, et al. Comparative study of therapeutic effect of pulsed electromagnetic field and laser therapy in treatment of primary periarthritis shoulder. Egypt Rheumatol Rehabil. 2007;34:251.

    Google Scholar 

  57. Otadi K, Hadian M-R, Olyaei G, Jalaie S. The beneficial effects of adding low level laser to ultrasound and exercise in Iranian women with shoulder tendonitis: a randomized clinical trial. J Back Musculoskelet Rehabil. 2012;25(1):13–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  58. Eslamian F, Shakouri SK, Ghojazadeh M, Nobari OE, Eftekharsadat B. Effects of low-level laser therapy in combination with physiotherapy in the management of rotator cuff tendinitis. Lasers Med Sci. 2012;27(5):951–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  59. Dogan SK, Saime A, Evcik D. The effectiveness of low laser therapy in subacromial impingement syndrome: a randomized placebo controlled double-blind prospective study. Clinics. 2010;65(10):1019–22.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  60. Abrisham SMJ, Kermani-Alghoraishi M, Ghahramani R, Jabbari L, Jomeh H, Zare M. Additive effects of low-level laser therapy with exercise on subacromial syndrome: a randomised, double-blind, controlled trial. Clin Rheumatol. 2011;30(10):1341–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  61. Pekyavas NO, Baltaci G. Short-term effects of high-intensity laser therapy, manual therapy, and Kinesio taping in patients with subacromial impingement syndrome. Lasers Med Sci. 2016;31(6):1133–41.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  62. Alfredo PP, Bjordal JM, Junior WS, Marques AP, Casarotto RA. Efficacy of low-level laser therapy combined with exercise for subacromial impingement syndrome: a randomised controlled trial. Clin Rehabil. 2021;35(6):851–60.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  63. Ökmen BM, Ökmen K. Comparison of photobiomodulation therapy and suprascapular nerve-pulsed radiofrequency in chronic shoulder pain: a randomized controlled, single-blind, clinical trial. Lasers Med Sci. 2017;32(8):1719–26.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  64. Teixeira AM, et al. Photobiomodulation therapy combined with static magnetic field reduces pain in patients with chronic nonspecific neck and/or shoulder pain: a randomized, triple-blinded, placebo-controlled trial. Life. 2022;12(5):656.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  65. Kolu E, Buyukavci R, Akturk S, Eren F, Ersoy Y. Comparison of high-intensity laser therapy and combination of transcutaneous nerve stimulation and ultrasound treatment in patients with chronic lumbar radiculopathy: a randomized single-blind study. Pakistan J Med Sci. 2018;34(3):530.

    Google Scholar 

  66. Stasinopoulos D, Stasinopoulos I, Pantelis M, Stasinopoulou K. Comparing the effects of exercise program and low-level laser therapy with exercise program and polarized polychromatic non-coherent light (bioptron light) on the treatment of lateral elbow tendinopathy. Photomed Laser Surg. 2009;27(3):513–20.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  67. Liu, X.-G., L. Cheng, and J.-M. Song, Effects of low-level laser therapy and eccentric exercises in the treatment of patellar tendinopathy. International Journal of Photoenergy 2014;2014.

  68. Stergioulas A, Stergioula M, Aarskog R, Lopes-Martins RA, Bjordal JM. Effects of low-level laser therapy and eccentric exercises in the treatment of recreational athletes with chronic achilles tendinopathy. Am J Sports Med. 2008;36(5):881–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  69. Saayman L, Hay C, Abrahamse H. Chiropractic manipulative therapy and low-level laser therapy in the management of cervical facet dysfunction: a randomized controlled study. J Manipul Physiol Ther. 2011;34(3):153–63.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  70. Gu K, Yan Y, Wei W, Li Y, Liu W, Guo Y, et al. Safety and efficacy study of an ozone laser combined therapy using puncture needle in the treatment of patients with cervical spondylosis. Clin Spine Surg. 2017;30(5):E505–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  71. Venosa M, Romanini E, Padua R, Cerciello S. Comparison of high-intensity laser therapy and combination of ultrasound treatment and transcutaneous nerve stimulation in patients with cervical spondylosis: a randomized controlled trial. Lasers Med Sci. 2019;34(5):947–53.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  72. Yilmaz M, Tarakci D, Tarakci E. Comparison of high-intensity laser therapy and combination of ultrasound treatment and transcutaneous nerve stimulation on cervical pain associated with cervical disc herniation: a randomized trial. Complement Ther Med. 2020;49:102295.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  73. De Carli M, Guerra M, Nunes T, Di Matteo R, De Luca C, Aranha A, et al. Piroxicam and laser phototherapy in the treatment of TMJ arthralgia: A double-blind randomised controlled trial. J Oral Rehabil. 2013;40(3):171–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  74. Elgohary HM, et al. Effects of ultrasound, laser and exercises on temporomandibular joint pain and trismus following head and neck cancer. Ann Rehabil Med. 2018;42(6):846–53.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  75. Brochado FT, Jesus LHd, Carrard VC, Freddo AL, Chaves KD, Martins MD. Comparative effectiveness of photobiomodulation and manual therapy alone or combined in TMD patients: a randomized clinical trial. Braz Oral Res. 2018;32:e50.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  76. Ahmad R, Elatief E, El Sayed W, Ali RR, Ashour EM, Abdelsamee M. Effect of conventional therapy and low level laser therapy on pain and limitation of daily functions in patients with temporomandibular joint dysfunction. Int J Physiother Res. 2018;6(2):2797–805.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  77. Panhoca VH, Bagnato VS, Alves N, Paolillo FR, Deana NF. Increased oral health-related quality of life postsynergistic treatment with ultrasound and photobiomodulation therapy in patients with temporomandibular disorders. Photobiomodul Photomed Laser Surg. 2019;37(11):694–9.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  78. Panhóca VH, Tamae PE Jr, AEA, Bagnato VS,. Comparison of the synergistic effect of vacuum therapy or ultrasound associated with low power laser applied in temporomandibular disorders. Oral Health Dental Manage. 2021;20(9):1–6.

    Google Scholar 

  79. Dias, W.C.F.G.d.S., et al. Effects of photobiomodulation combined with orofacial myofunctional therapy on the quality of life of individuals with temporomandibular disorder. in CoDAS. 2022. SciELO Brasil.

  80. Matsutani LA, Marques A, Ferreira E, Assumpção A, Lage L, Casarotto R, et al. Effectiveness of muscle stretching exercises with and without laser therapy at tender points for patients with fibromyalgia. Clin Exp Rheumatol. 2007;25(3):410–5.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  81. da Silva MM, Albertini R, de Tarso Camillo Carvalho P, Leal-Junior ECP, Bussadori SK, Vieira SS, et al. Randomized, blinded, controlled trial on effectiveness of photobiomodulation therapy and exercise training in the fibromyalgia treatment. Lasers Med Sci. 2018;33(2):343–51.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  82. Germano Maciel D, Trajano da Silva M, Rodrigues JA, Viana Neto JB, de França IM, Melo ABM, et al. Low-level laser therapy combined to functional exercise on treatment of fibromyalgia: a double-blind randomized clinical trial. Lasers Med Sci. 2018;33(9):1949–59.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  83. Aquino Junior AEd, Carbinatto FM, Franco DM, Bruno JdSA, Simão MLdS, Fernandes AC, et al. The laser and ultrasound: the ultra laser like efficient treatment to fibromyalgia by palms of hands-comparative study. J Novel Physiother. 2021;11(1):1000447–51.

    Google Scholar 

  84. Paolillo AR, Paolillo FR, João JP, João HA, Bagnato VS. Synergic effects of ultrasound and laser on the pain relief in women with hand osteoarthritis. Lasers Med Sci. 2015;30(1):279–86.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  85. Gavish L, Spitzer E, Friedman I, Lowe J, Folk N, Zarbiv Y, et al. Photobiomodulation as an adjunctive treatment to physiotherapy for reduction of anterior knee pain in combat soldiers: a prospective, double-blind, randomized, pragmatic, sham-controlled trial. Lasers Surg Med. 2021;53(10):1376–85.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  86. Murakami F, Kemmotsu O, Kawano Y, Matsumura C, Kaseno S, Imai M. Diode low reactive level laser therapy and stellate ganglion block compared in the treatment of facial palsy. Laser Ther. 1993;5(3):131–5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  87. Yamada H, Yamanaka Y, Orihara H, Ogawa H. A preliminary clinical study comparing the effect of low level laser therapy (LLLT) and corticosteroid therapy in the treatment of facial palsy. Laser Ther. 1995;7(4):157–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  88. Ordahan B. Role of low-level laser therapy added to facial expression exercises in patients with idiopathic facial (Bell’s) palsy. Lasers Med Sci. 2017;32(4):931–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  89. Naeser MA, Hahn K-AK, Lieberman BE, Branco KF. Carpal tunnel syndrome pain treated with low-level laser and microamperes transcutaneous electric nerve stimulation: a controlled study. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2002;83(7):978–88.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  90. Dincer U, Cakar E, Kiralp MZ, Kilac H, Dursun H. The effectiveness of conservative treatments of carpal tunnel syndrome: splinting, ultrasound, and low-level laser therapies. Photomed Laser Surg. 2009;27(1):119–25.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  91. Yagci I, et al. Comparison of splinting and splinting plus low-level laser therapy in idiopathic carpal tunnel syndrome. Clin Rheumatol. 2009;28(9):1059–65.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  92. Fusakul Y, Aranyavalai T, Saensri P, Thiengwittayaporn S. Low-level laser therapy with a wrist splint to treat carpal tunnel syndrome: a double-blinded randomized controlled trial. Lasers Med Sci. 2014;29(3):1279–87.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  93. Tabatabai SMR, Bashardoust Tajali S, Attarbashi Moghadam B, Mir SM. Effects of high-Power diode laser irradiation combined with electrical stimulation on wrist pain and function following carpal tunnel syndrome. J Clin Physiother Res. 2016;1(2):61–7.

    Google Scholar 

  94. Güner A, Altan L, Kasapoğlu Aksoy M. The effectiveness of the low-power laser and kinesiotaping in the treatment of carpal tunnel syndrome, a pilot study. Rheumatol Int. 2018;38(5):895–904.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  95. Bartkowiak Z, Eliks M, Zgorzalewicz-Stachowiak M, Romanowski L. The effects of nerve and tendon gliding exercises combined with low-level laser or ultrasound therapy in carpal tunnel syndrome. Ind J Orthop. 2019;53(2):347–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  96. Salehpour F, Farajdokht F, Cassano P, Sadigh-Eteghad S, Erfani M, Hamblin MR, et al. Near-infrared photobiomodulation combined with coenzyme Q10 for depression in a mouse model of restraint stress: reduction in oxidative stress, neuroinflammation, and apoptosis. Brain Res Bull. 2019;144:213–22.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  97. Meynaghizadeh-Zargar R, Sadigh-Eteghad S, Mohaddes G, Salehpour F, Rasta SH. Effects of transcranial photobiomodulation and methylene blue on biochemical and behavioral profiles in mice stress model. Lasers Med Sci. 2020;35(3):573–84.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  98. Farazi N, Mahmoudi J, Sadigh-Eteghad S, Farajdokht F, Rasta SH. Synergistic effects of combined therapy with transcranial photobiomodulation and enriched environment on depressive-and anxiety-like behaviors in a mice model of noise stress. Lasers Med Sci. 2022;37(2):1181–91.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  99. Moges H, Vasconcelos OM, Campbell WW, Borke RC, McCoy JA, Kaczmarczyk L, et al. Light therapy and supplementary Riboflavin in the SOD1 transgenic mouse model of familial amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (FALS). Lasers Surg Med. 2009;41(1):52–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  100. Lapchak PA, Han M-K, Salgado KF, Streeter J, Zivin JA. Safety profile of transcranial near-infrared laser therapy administered in combination with thrombolytic therapy to embolized rabbits. Stroke. 2008;39(11):3073–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  101. Li X, Hou W, Wu X, Jiang W, Chen H, Xiao N, et al. 660 nm red light-enhanced bone marrow mesenchymal stem cell transplantation for hypoxic-ischemic brain damage treatment. Neural Regen Res. 2014;9(3):236.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  102. Salehpour F, Farajdokht F, Mahmoudi J, Erfani M, Farhoudi M, Karimi P, et al. Photobiomodulation and coenzyme Q10 treatments attenuate cognitive impairment associated with model of transient global brain ischemia in artificially aged mice. Front Cell Neurosci. 2019;13:74.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  103. Menovsky T, Beek JF. Carbon dioxide laser-assisted nerve repair: effect of solder and suture material on nerve regeneration in rat sciatic nerve. Microsurgery. 2003;23(2):109–16.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  104. Duke AR, et al. Hybrid electro-optical stimulation of the rat sciatic nerve induces force generation in the plantarflexor muscles. J Neural Eng. 2012;9(6):066006.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  105. Dias FJ, et al. Application of a low-level laser therapy and the purified protein from natural latex (Hevea brasiliensis) in the controlled crush injury of the sciatic nerve of rats: a morphological, quantitative, and ultrastructural study. BioMed Res Int. 2013;2013.

  106. Yang CC, Wang J, Chen SC, Hsieh YL. Synergistic effects of low-level laser and mesenchymal stem cells on functional recovery in rats with crushed sciatic nerves. J Tissue Eng Regen Med. 2016;10(2):120–31.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  107. Dias FJ, Issa JPM, Coutinho-Netto J, Fazan VP, Sousa LG, Iyomasa MM, et al. Morphometric and high resolution scanning electron microscopy analysis of low-level laser therapy and latex protein (Hevea brasiliensis) administration following a crush injury of the sciatic nerve in rats. J Neurol Sci. 2015;349(1–2):129–37.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  108. Muniz KL, Dias FJ, Coutinho-Netto J, Calzzani RAJ, Iyomasa MM, Sousa LGD, et al. Properties of the tibialis anterior muscle after treatment with laser therapy and natural latex protein following sciatic nerve crush. Muscle Nerve. 2015;52(5):869–75.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  109. de Souza LG, Marcolino AM, Kuriki HU, Gonçalves ECD, Fonseca MdCR, Barbosa RI. Comparative effect of photobiomodulation associated with dexamethasone after sciatic nerve injury model. Lasers Med Sci. 2018;33(6):1341–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  110. Dias FJ, et al. Growth factors expression and ultrastructural morphology after application of low-level laser and natural latex protein on a sciatic nerve crush-type injury. Plos One. 2019;14(1):e0210211.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  111. de Souza LG, Hendler KG, Marcolino AM, Kuriki HU, Cardoso RB, de Cássia Registro Fonseca M, et al. Photobiomodulation promotes neural regeneration when compared to simvastatin treatment in a sciatic nerve crush model. Lasers Med Sci. 2021;36(8):1591–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  112. Souza FId, Cristante AF, Marcon RM, Ferreira R, Santos GBd, Barros Filho TEPd. Transdermal monosialoganglioside with laser in the treatment of spinal cord lesion in rats. Acta Ortopédica Brasileira. 2013;21:87–91.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  113. Janzadeh A, Sarveazad A, Yousefifard M, Dameni S, Samani FS, Mokhtarian K, et al. Combine effect of Chondroitinase ABC and low level laser (660 nm) on spinal cord injury model in adult male rats. Neuropeptides. 2017;65:90–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  114. Pedram MS, Dehghan MM, Shojaee M, Fekrazad R, Sharifi D, Farzan A, et al. Therapeutic effects of simultaneous photobiomodulation therapy (PBMT) and meloxicam administration on experimental acute spinal cord injury: rat animal model. J Photochem Photobiol, B. 2018;189:49–54.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  115. Sarveazad A, Janzadeh A, Taheripak G, Dameni S, Yousefifard M, Nasirinezhad F. Co-administration of human adipose-derived stem cells and low-level laser to alleviate neuropathic pain after experimental spinal cord injury. Stem Cell Res Ther. 2019;10(1):1–15.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  116. Janzadeh A, Sarveazad A, Hamblin MR, Teheripak G, Kookli K, Nasirinezhad F. The effect of chondroitinase ABC and photobiomodulation therapy on neuropathic pain after spinal cord injury in adult male rats. Physiol Behav. 2020;227:113141.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  117. Chen H, Wang Y, Tu W, Wang H, Yin H, Sha H, et al. Effects of photobiomodulation combined with MSCs transplantation on the repair of spinal cord injury in rat. J Cell Physiol. 2021;236(2):921–30.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  118. Dong T, et al. Low-level light in combination with metabolic modulators for effective therapy of injured brain. J Cereb Blood Flow Metab. 2015;35(9):1435–44.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  119. Buchaim DV, et al. The new heterologous fibrin sealant in combination with low-level laser therapy (LLLT) in the repair of the buccal branch of the facial nerve. Lasers Med Sci. 2016;31(5):965–72.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  120. de Oliveira Rosso MP, et al. Stimulation of morphofunctional repair of the facial nerve with photobiomodulation, using the end-to-side technique or a new heterologous fibrin sealant. J Photochem Photobiol, B. 2017;175:20–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  121. Jameie SB, Masoumipoor M, Janzadeh A, Nasirinezhad F, Kerdari M, Soleimani M. Combined therapeutic effects of low power laser (980nm) and CoQ10 on Neuropathic pain in adult male rat. Med J Islam Repub Iran. 2014;28:58.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  122. Noma D, Fujita S, Zama M, Mayahara K, Motoyoshi M, Kobayashi M. Application of oxytocin with low-level laser irradiation suppresses the facilitation of cortical excitability by partial ligation of the infraorbital nerve in rats: an optical imaging study. Brain Res. 2020;1728:146588.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  123. Martins D, et al. Photobiomodulation and B vitamins administration produces antinociception in an orofacial pain model through the modulation of glial cells and cytokines expression. Brain Behav Immunity-Health. 2020;2:100040.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  124. de FreitasDutra Júnior E, et al. Treatment of partial injury of the calcaneus tendon with heterologous fibrin biopolymer and/or photobiomodulation in rats. Lasers Med Sci. 2022;37(2):971–81.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  125. Dias FJ, Issa JPM, Iyomasa MM, Coutinho-Netto J, Calzzani RAJ, Iyomasa DM, et al. Application of a low-level laser therapy and the purified protein from natural latex (Hevea brasiliensis) in the controlled crush injury of the sciatic nerve of rats: a morphological, quantitative, and ultrastructural study. BioMed Res Int. 2013;2013:597863.

  126. Martins D, Marques D, Venega R, Chacur M. Photobiomodulation and B vitamins administration produces antinociception in an orofacial pain model through the modulation of glial cells and cytokines expression. Brain, Behavior, Immunity-Health. 2020;2:100040.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  127. Teixeira AM, Leal-Junior ECP, Casalechi HL, Vanin AA, de Paiva PRV, Melo FHC, et al. Photobiomodulation therapy combined with static magnetic field reduces pain in patients with chronic nonspecific neck and/or shoulder pain: a randomized, triple-blinded. Placebo-Contr Trial Life. 2022;12(5):656.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  128. Liu X-G, Cheng L, Song J-M. Effects of low-level laser therapy and eccentric exercises in the treatment of patellar tendinopathy. International Journal of Photoenergy. 2014;2014.

  129. Dias WCFGdS, Cavalcanti RVA, Magalhães Júnior HV, Pernambuco LdA, Alves GÂdS, editors. Effects of photobiomodulation combined with orofacial myofunctional therapy on the quality of life of individuals with temporomandibular disorder. CoDAS; 2022: SciELO Brasil.

Download references

Acknowledgements

The present study was supported by The Tabriz University of Medical Sciences.

Funding

The study supported by “Tabriz University of Medical Sciences” (NO: 72471). The funding body played no role in the design of the study and collection, analysis, and interpretation of data.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Neurosciences Research Center, Tabriz University of Medical Sciences, Tabriz, 5166614756, Iran

    Narmin Farazi, Fereshteh Farajdokht, Javad Mahmoudi & Saeed Sadigh-Eteghad

  2. Research Center for Evidence-Based Medicine, Iranian EBM Centre: A Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) Center of Excellence, Tabriz University of Medical Sciences, Tabriz, Iran

    Hanieh Salehi-Pourmehr

Authors
  1. Narmin Farazi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Hanieh Salehi-Pourmehr
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Fereshteh Farajdokht
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Javad Mahmoudi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Saeed Sadigh-Eteghad
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

NF and SSE designed the study. HSP, FF, and JM did the literature search, study quality assessment, and data extraction. NF and SSE drafted the tables and Figs. NF wrote the first draft of this review, and SSE helped to finish the final version. HSP, FF and JM helped with the revision of the manuscript. All authors approved the conclusions of our study.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Saeed Sadigh-Eteghad.

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate

Not applicable.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

The original online version of this article was revised: The conclusion section was missing in the published article. This is now added.

Supplementary Information

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Farazi, N., Salehi-Pourmehr, H., Farajdokht, F. et al. Photobiomodulation combination therapy as a new insight in neurological disorders: a comprehensive systematic review. BMC Neurol 24, 101 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12883-024-03593-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12883-024-03593-4

Keywords

BMC Neurology

ISSN: 1471-2377

Contact us