English Polski
Online first
Research paper
Published online: 2024-12-06

open access

Page views 31
Article views/downloads 26
Get Citation

Connect on Social Media

Connect on Social Media

Polarized light therapy in the treatment of venous leg ulcers — pilot study

Jarosław Pasek1, Sebastian Szajkowski2, Joanna Gmyrek3, Grzegorz Cieślar3
DOI: 10.5603/aa.98608

Abstract

Introduction: Venous leg ulcers are still a significant healthcare problem capable of diminishing quality of
life, lengthening hospitalization, and incurring substantial costs for patients and healthcare systems. In recent
years, selected physical methods have been increasingly used in the complex treatment of leg ulcers.

Material and methods: The study included 24 patients, 11 male (45.8%) and 13 female (54.1%) aged
between 46 and 85 years (mean age: 65.25 ± 9.35 years) with venous leg ulcers lasting for 12.58 ± 7.25
months, who underwent a cycle of polarized light therapy (30 daily procedures lasting 20 minutes each). The
progress in wound healing was evaluated by computerized planimetry and pain intensity was assessed with the
use of a visual analog scale (VAS) before the beginning and after the completion of the therapy.

Results: After the end of treatment using polarized light therapy, the median (IQR) area of the treated ulcers
decreased statistically significantly compared to the baseline values from 4.0 (3.25–4.45) cm to 2.25 (2.0–2.95)
cm² (p < 0.001). A statistically significant reduction in the area of ulcers after the end of the treatment cycle
compared to the baseline values was also observed in subgroups analyzed in terms of gender, age, BMI value,
and the duration and location of the ulcer. A reduction in the ulcer surface area was achieved in all treated
patients, and the average percentage change in ulcer surface area was 33.93 ± 11.32%. After completing
the course of treatments, a statistically significant reduction of pain intensity on the VAS scale was also achieved,
from a median (IQR) level of 6.5 (6–8) points before treatment to 2.0 (2.0–2.0) points after treatment
(p < 0.001). A statistically significant reduction in pain intensity was also observed in analyzed subgroups in
terms of gender, age, BMI value, and the duration and location of the ulcer.

Conclusions: In patients with venous leg ulcers, polarized light therapy has a positive effect on the intensity
of the ulcer healing process in objective planimetric assessment and reduces the intensity of pain ailments.

Article available in PDF format

View PDF Download PDF file

References

  1. Liebert A, Kiat H. The history of light therapy in hospital physiotherapy and medicine with emphasis on Australia: Evolution into novel areas of practice. Physiother Theory Pract. 2021; 37(3): 389–400.
  2. Jarrett P, Scragg R. A short history of phototherapy, vitamin D and skin disease. Photochem Photobiol Sci. 2017; 16(3): 283–290.
  3. Pasek J, Cieślar G, Pasek T, et al. Polarized light therapy – new possibilities of phototherapy? Balneol Pol. 2008; 50: 93–99.
  4. Sieroń A, Cieślar G. eds.): Magnetic fields and light in medicine and physiotherapy. Publisher α–medica press Bielsko–Biała. ; 2013.
  5. Graves N, Phillips CJ, Harding K. A narrative review of the epidemiology and economics of chronic wounds. Br J Dermatol. 2022; 187(2): 141–148.
  6. Sopata M, Jawień A, Mrozikiewicz-Rakowska B, et al. Wytyczne postępowania miejscowego w ranach niezakażonych, zagrożonych infekcją oraz zakażonych – przegląd dostępnych substancji przeciwdrobnoustrojowych stosowanych w leczeniu ran. Zalecenia Polskiego Towarzystwa Leczenia Ran. Leczenie ran. 2020; 17(1): 1–21.
  7. Gethin G, Probst S, Stryja J, et al. Evidence for person-centred care in chronic wound care: A systematic review and recommendations for practice. J Wound Care. 2020; 29(Sup9b): S1–S22.
  8. Kucharzewski M, Szkiler E, Krasowski G, et al. Algorytmy i wytyczne postępowania terapeutycznego w ranach trudno gojących się. Forum Leczenia Ran. 2020; 1(3): 95–116.
  9. Allam MN, Eladl HM, Eid MM. Polarized Light Therapy in the Treatment of Wounds: A Review. Int J Low Extrem Wounds. 2022 [Epub ahead of print]: 15347346221113991.
  10. Hamblin MR. Role of polarized light in photobiomodulation. Photobiomodul Photomed Laser Surg. 2022; 40(12): 775–776.
  11. Feehan J, Burrows SP, Cornelius L, et al. Therapeutic applications of polarized light: Tissue healing and immunomodulatory effects. Maturitas. 2018; 116: 11–17.
  12. Pasek J, Szajkowski S, Pietrzak M, et al. Comparison of the efficacy of topical hyperbaric oxygen therapy alone vs a combination of physical methods including topical hyperbaric oxygen therapy, magnetotherapy, and low-energy light therapy in the treatment of venous leg ulcers. Dermatol Ther. 2020; 33(6): e14474.
  13. Thong ISK, Jensen MP, Miró J, et al. The validity of pain intensity measures: what do the NRS, VAS, VRS, and FPS-R measure? Scand J Pain. 2018; 18(1): 99–107.
  14. Nussbaum SR, Carter MJ, Fife CE, et al. An Economic Evaluation of the Impact, Cost, and Medicare Policy Implications of Chronic Nonhealing Wounds. Value Health. 2018; 21(1): 27–32.
  15. Feehan J, Tripodi N, Fraser S, et al. Polarized light therapy: Shining a light on the mechanism underlying its immunomodulatory effects. J Biophotonics. 2020; 13(3): e201960177.
  16. Liu YL, Gong SY, Xia ST, et al. Light therapy: a new option for neurodegenerative diseases. Chin Med J (Engl). 2020; 134(6): 634–645.
  17. Medenica L, Lens M. The use of polarised polychromatic non-coherent light alone as a therapy for venous leg ulceration. J Wound Care. 2003; 12(1): 37–40.
  18. Pasek J, Cieślar G, Stanek A, et al. Polarized light therapy in the treatment of leg ulcer of unknown etiology – case report. Przegl Flebol. 2010; 18: 57–60.
  19. Pinheiro AL, Pozza DH, Oliveira MG, et al. Polarized light (400-2000 nm) and non-ablative laser (685 nm): a description of the wound healing process using immunohistochemical analysis. Photomed Laser Surg. 2005; 23(5): 485–492.
  20. Durović A, Marić D, Brdareski Z, et al. The effects of polarized light therapy in pressure ulcer healing. Vojnosanit Pregl. 2008; 65(12): 906–912.