| Title |
Low-level laser therapy in IL-1β, COX-2, and PGE2 modulation in partially injured Achilles tendon
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Lasers in Medical Science, July 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10103-014-1636-y |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Julio Fernandes de Jesus, Diva Denelle Spadacci-Morena, Nayra Deise dos Anjos Rabelo, Carlos Eduardo Pinfildi, Thiago Yukio Fukuda, Helio Plapler |
| Abstract |
This study evaluated IL-1β, COX-2, and PGE2 modulation in partially injured Achilles tendons treated with low-level laser therapy (LLLT). Sixty-five male Wistar rats were used. Sixty were submitted to a direct injury on Achilles tendon and then distributed into six groups: LASER 1 (a single LLLT application), LASER 3 (three LLLT applications), and LASER 7 (seven LLLT applications) and Sham 1, 3, and 7 (the same injury but LLLT applications were simulated). The five remaining animals were allocated at control group (no procedure performed). LLLT (780 nm) was applied with 70 mW of mean power and 17.5 J/cm(2) of fluency for 10 s, once a day. The tendons were surgically removed and assessed immunohistochemically for IL-1β, COX-2, and PGE2. In comparisons with control (IL-1β: 100.5 ± 92.5 / COX-2: 180.1 ± 97.1 / PGE2: 187.8 ± 128.8) IL-1β exhibited (mean ± SD) near-normal level (p > 0.05) at LASER 3 (142.0 ± 162.4). COX-2 and PGE2 exhibited near-normal levels (p > 0.05) at LASER 3 (COX-2: 176.9 ± 75.4 / PGE2: 297.2 ± 259.6) and LASER 7 (COX-2: 259.2 ± 190.4 / PGE2: 587.1 ± 409.7). LLLT decreased Achilles tendon's inflammatory process. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 57 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 57 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 10 | 18% |
| Unspecified | 8 | 14% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 8 | 14% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 4 | 7% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 7% |
| Other | 17 | 30% |
| Unknown | 6 | 11% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 21 | 37% |
| Unspecified | 8 | 14% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 8 | 14% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 4% |
| Engineering | 2 | 4% |
| Other | 7 | 12% |
| Unknown | 9 | 16% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 14 September 2016.
All research outputs
#17,723,634
of 22,758,963 outputs
Outputs from Lasers in Medical Science
#817
of 1,306 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#154,453
of 228,919 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Lasers in Medical Science
#9
of 26 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,758,963 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,306 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.0. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 228,919 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 26 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 53% of its contemporaries.