Peer-reviewed veterinary case report
Red and infrared light effects on horse wound healing
By Michanek, Peter et al.·Published in Equine veterinary journal·2021·Department of Biomedical Sciences and Veterinary Public Health·View original on PubMed →
PetCaseFinder translated the abstract of this peer-reviewed paper into plain English so pet owners can read it. We do not publish original research — every detail traces back to the citation above. How we work →
Original publication title: Effect of infrared and red monochromatic light on equine wound healing.
- Species:
- horse
Plain-English summary
A group of eight healthy horses had circular skin wounds created on their necks to test if light therapy using red and near-infrared light could help them heal faster. One wound on each horse received the light treatment, while the other wound was left untreated. After monitoring the wounds for up to 36 days, researchers found no significant difference in healing time or swelling between the treated and untreated wounds. This suggests that using red and near-infrared light for wound healing in horses may not be effective.
People also search for: horse wound healing treatment · LED light therapy for horses · how to treat horse wounds
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Light-emitting diodes (LEDs) are commonly used for treating a variety of disorders in horses, including wounds. Despite its claim to shorten healing times, there is a lack of scientific documentation regarding its effects. OBJECTIVES: To investigate if treatment with pulsating visible red light (λ ≈ 637 nm) and near-infrared (NIR) light (λ ≈ 956 nm) affects wound healing. STUDY DESIGN: Randomised blinded controlled experimental study. METHODS: A circular skin wound (Ø = 2 cm) was created on each side of the neck in eight healthy horses. One randomly chosen wound received light treatment and the other served as an untreated control. Treatment duration was 4 minutes and 40 seconds (red light 95 seconds, 2.3 mW/cm; NIR light 185 seconds, 6.4 mW/cm) and was performed once daily on day 0-4, 7-11, 14-18 and 21-25. The wounds were photographed and evaluated using digital photoplanimetry on day 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 7, 14, 21, 28 and 35. The degree of swelling was assessed with diagnostic ultrasound on the same days except the last recording was performed on day 36 instead of 35. Days to total healing was recorded. ANOVA was used for statistical analysis (P < .05). RESULTS: The wound area (P = .2-.9) and degree of swelling (P = .2-1.0) did not differ between treated and control groups on any day. There was a significant difference (P = .03) in healing time between control (49.0, 95% CI = 35.4-62.6 days) and treated wounds (51.8, 95% CI = 38.7-64.8 days). MAIN LIMITATIONS: The wounds were treated until day 25 and this study does not investigate the effect of a longer treatment period than 25 days. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study do not indicate any clinically relevant positive effect of pulsating visible red light and NIR light on the healing of experimental skin wounds in horses, compared with no treatment.
Find similar cases for your pet
PetCaseFinder finds other peer-reviewed reports of pets with the same symptoms, plus a plain-English summary of what was tried across them.
Search related cases →Original publication on PubMed: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32285517/