Wound size between two groups.

Purpose
The management of pressure ulcers (PUs) poses challenges due to their chronic nature and the lack of established conservative treatment methods. In this clinical trial, our objective was to examine the validity and safety of using a light-emitting diode device contained four wavelengths in the treatment of grade 2 sacral PUs.
Method
A total of 38 patients were randomly assigned to two groups: sham device (Sham) and experimental device (LED) group. The treatment sessions were conducted over a period of four weeks, with a frequency of three times per week. The study was conducted in a double-blinded manner. The study assessed the primary validity by measuring wound size and re-epithelialization after 0 and 4 weeks. Secondary evaluations included epidermal regeneration, collagen density, and immunological markers. Safety was evaluated by monitoring adverse reactions throughout the trial.
Result
The presence of eschar was found to have a significant impact on wound healing. Sham consisted of 15 wounds without eschar, while LED had nine. After treatment in without eschar situation, the post-treatment size of wounds in Sham was 13.80 ± 20.29%, while it was 3.52 ± 6.68% in LED. However, there was no significant difference (p = 0.070). And analysis of epidermal thickness showed a significant increase in LED (495.62 ± 327.09 μm) compared to Sham (195.36 ± 263.04 μm) (p < 0.0001).
Conclusion
While LED treatment had a potential for wound reduction in PUs without eschar, we could not uncover evidence to support the efficacy of LED treatment in grade 2 PUs.