Table 6.
aPDT treatment in patients with oral viral infections.
| Author/year | Study design | Study groups | Photosensitizer type/concentration | Light type and irradiation parameters | Microorganism | Follow-up periods | Outcomes |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ajmal (2021) | Randomized clinical trial | Test 1: Acyclovir Test 2: aPDT Test 3: aPDT + Acyclovir | Methylene blue, 0.005% | Diode laser: 660 nm, 150 mW, 300 J/cm2, 30 s single session | Herpes simplex virus type 1 | 0, 2, and 4 weeks; 3 and 6 months | Group aPDT + Acyclovir showed the most significant reduction in the quantified HSV-1, pain scores, and reported levels of IL-6 and TNF-α compared to other groups. No difference was observed in terms of pain scores among groups. |
| Ramalho et al. (2021) | Randomized clinical trial | Test 1: aPDT Test 2: Acyclovir Test 3: aPDT + Acyclovir | Methylene blue, 0.005% | Low-power laser: 660 nm, 40 mW, 120 J/cm2, 120 s per point single session | Herpes Simplex Virus Type 1 | 7 days | On day 1, the AC group showed less wound size reduction and higher edema compared to the AC-PDT group. No significant differences were observed in the size of the lesion between groups from day 2. aPDT and Acyclovir showed no significant difference regarding healing time, edema and pain. |
| Vellappally et al. (2022) | Randomized clinical trial | Test 1: topical anti-viral therapy Test 2: aPDT Test 3: aPDT + topical anti-viral therapy | Methylene blue, 0.005% | 640 nm, 4 J, 300 J/cm2, 150 mW, 0.025 cm2, and 30–40 s for each lesion |
NR, not reported; nm, nanometers; μM, micrometer; mW, milliwatts; s, seconds.