Dermatologic surgery : official publication for American Society for Dermatologic Surgery [et al.] · 2010
A randomized, controlled, double-blind study of light emitting diode photomodulation for the prevention of radiation dermatitis in patients with breast cancer.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяРандомизированное исследованиеПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Fife Douglas, Rayhan David J, Behnam Shahdad, Ortiz Arisa, Elkeeb Laila, Aquino Lisa, Eduardo Roa D, Ramsinghani Nilam, Kuo Jeffrey, Newcomb Robert, Zachary Christopher B, Kelly Kristen M
Аннотация
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Radiation dermatitis occurs in a majority of patients with breast cancer who receive radiation therapy (RT), causes significant pain, and may necessitate treatment delay. Light emitting diode (LED) photomodulation has been reported to minimize radiation dermatitis. This study sought to further evaluate the efficacy of LED photomodulation in lessening radiation dermatitis.
MATERIALS & METHODS: After surgery, patients with breast cancer received LED photomodulation or sham treatments in conjunction with three-dimensional conformal RT. Reactions were evaluated using standardized photographs graded according to National Cancer Institute criteria.
RESULTS: In the LED treatment group (n=18), no patients had grade 0 reactions, six (33.3%) had grade 1 reactions, 12 (66.7%) had grade 2 reactions, and none had a grade 3 reaction. In the sham treatment group (n=15), one (6.6%) patient had a grade 0 reaction, four (26.7%) had grade 1 reactions, 9 (60.0%) had grade 2 reactions, and one (6.7%) had a grade 3 reaction. Two (11.1%) patients in the LED treatment group and one (6.7%) in the control group had to interrupt treatment. Differences between groups were not statistically significant.
CONCLUSION: LED photomodulation did not reduce the incidence of radiation-induced skin reactions or interruptions in therapy. .
MATERIALS & METHODS: After surgery, patients with breast cancer received LED photomodulation or sham treatments in conjunction with three-dimensional conformal RT. Reactions were evaluated using standardized photographs graded according to National Cancer Institute criteria.
RESULTS: In the LED treatment group (n=18), no patients had grade 0 reactions, six (33.3%) had grade 1 reactions, 12 (66.7%) had grade 2 reactions, and none had a grade 3 reaction. In the sham treatment group (n=15), one (6.6%) patient had a grade 0 reaction, four (26.7%) had grade 1 reactions, 9 (60.0%) had grade 2 reactions, and one (6.7%) had a grade 3 reaction. Two (11.1%) patients in the LED treatment group and one (6.7%) in the control group had to interrupt treatment. Differences between groups were not statistically significant.
CONCLUSION: LED photomodulation did not reduce the incidence of radiation-induced skin reactions or interruptions in therapy. .