Exploring the Use of Intracranial and Extracranial (Remote) Photobiomodulation Devices in Parkinson’s Disease: A Comparison of Direct and Indirect Systemic Stimulations
Affiliations: [a]
Department of Anatomy, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia
| [b]
Department of Physiology, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia
| [c] Geriatric Medicine, Royal Hobart Hospital, Hobart, Australia
| [d]
University Grenoble Alpes, CEA, LETI, CLINATEC, MINATEC Campus, Grenoble, France
Correspondence:
[*]
Correspondence to: John Mitrofanis, Department of Anatomy, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia. E-mail: john.mitrofanis@sydney.edu.au.
Abstract: In recent times, photobiomodulation has been shown to be beneficial in animal models of Parkinson’s disease, improving locomotive behavior and being neuroprotective. Early observations in people with Parkinson’s disease have been positive also, with improvements in the non-motor symptoms of the disease being evident most consistently. Although the precise mechanisms behind these improvements are not clear, two have been proposed: direct stimulation, where light reaches and acts directly on the distressed neurons, and remote stimulation, where light influences cells and/or molecules that provide systemic protection, thereby acting indirectly on distressed neurons. In relation to Parkinson’s disease, given that the major zone of pathology lies deep in the brain and that light from an extracranial or external photobiomodulation device would not reach these vulnerable regions, stimulating the distressed neurons directly would require intracranial delivery of light using a device implanted close to the vulnerable regions. For indirect systemic stimulation, photobiomodulation could be applied to either the head and scalp, using a transcranial helmet, or to a more remote body part (e.g., abdomen, leg). In this review, we discuss the evidence for both the direct and indirect neuroprotective effects of photobiomodulation in Parkinson’s disease and propose that both types of treatment modality, when working together using both intracranial and extracranial devices, provide the best therapeutic option.
