Effects of intravascular photobiomodulation on cognitive impairment and crossed cerebellar diaschisis in patients with traumatic brain injury: a longitudinal study

The association between intravascular photobiomodulation (iPBM) and crossed cerebellar diaschisis (CCD) and cognitive dysfunction in patients with traumatic brain injury (TBI) remains unknown. We postulate that iPBM might enable greater neurologic improvements. The objective of this study was to evaluate the clinical impact of iPBM on the prognosis of patients with TBI. In this longitudinal study, patients who were diagnosed with TBI were recruited. CCD was identified from brain perfusion images when the uptake difference of both cerebella was > 20%. Thus, two groups were identified: CCD( +) and CCD( −). All patients received general traditional physical therapy and three courses of iPBM (helium–neon laser illuminator, 632.8 nm). Treatment assemblies were conducted on weekdays for 2 consecutive weeks as a solitary treatment course. Three courses of iPBM were performed over 2–3 months, with 1–3 weeks of rest between each course. The outcomes were measured using the Rancho Los Amigos Levels of Cognitive Functioning (LCF) tool. The chi-square test was used to compare categorical variables. Generalized estimating equations were used to verify the associations of various effects between the two groups. p < 0.05 indicated a statistically significant difference. Thirty patients were included and classified into the CCD( +) and CCD( −) groups (n = 15, each group). Statistics showed that before iPBM, CCD in the CCD( +) group was 2.74 (exp 1.0081) times higher than that of CCD( −) group (p = 0.1632). After iPBM, the CCD was 0.64 (exp-0.4436) times lower in the CCD( +) group than in the CCD( −) group (p < 0.0001). Cognitive assessment revealed that, before iPBM, the CCD( +) group had a non-significantly 0.1030 lower LCF score than that of CCD( −) group (p = 0.1632). Similarly, the CCD( +) group had a non-significantly 0.0013 higher score than that of CCD( −) after iPBM treatment (p = 0.7041), indicating no significant differences between the CCD( +) or CCD( −) following iPBM and general physical therapy. CCD was less likely to appear in iPBM-treated patients. Additionally, iPBM was not associated with LCF score. Administration of iPBM could be applied in TBI patients to reduce the occurrence of CCD. The study failed to show differences in cognitive function after iPBM, which still serves as an alternative non-pharmacological intervention.