Clinical usefulness of high intensity green light phototherapy in the treatment of neonatal jaundice

Abstract

Two matched groups of term newborn infants with idiopathic jaundice were subjected to intensive double direction green or blue light phototherapy (PT). The efficacy of treatment was expressed as rate of decline of serum bilirubin concentration after 6, 12 and 24 h of light exposure. More rapid response was obtained using conventional blue lamps (Philips TL/20W/52) than green lamps (Sylvania F20T12/G). Whole duration of PT was significantly shorter using blue lamps (P less than 0.05). However, less postphototherapy rebound was observed in babies treated with green light PT. It can be concluded that green light PT is useful but not preferable to blue light PT for clinical use in the treatment of neonatal jaundice.

A Prospective Randomized Controlled Study of Phototherapy Using Blue and Blue-Green Light-Emitting Devices, and Conventional Halogen-Quartz Phototherapy

“…12 In the present study, we took advantage of the narrow spectrum of the LEDs in order to reassess the controversial efficacy of green versus blue phototherapy. [4][5][6][7][8][9][10] Notwithstanding theoretical reasoning for better penetration of green and better absorption of blue light, we found no statistically significant difference in the efficacy of blue-green light over either blue or white light.…”

“…[4][5][6][7][8][9][10] Data obtained in in vitro investigations 13 and in Gunn rat experiments 14 suggested that green fluorescent light has a low efficiency in lowering bilirubin concentrations. However, clinical studies on the effect of green fluorescent light on the rate of bilirubin photodegradation showed it to be of superior, 5 similar 6,8 or inferior 7 efficiency when compared with blue fluorescent light.…”

“…One explanation for the apparent discrepancies among these clinical trials [5][6][7][8] is that the greater skin penetration of green light may offset in vivo its lower efficacy in vitro. Longer wavelengths are able to penetrate deeper into the skin than shorter wavelengths.…”

“…19 Earlier studies used lamps with less discrete blue wavelengths, with a strong narrow mercury emission band at 436 nm, and weaker bands at 365, 405, and 546 nm. [4][5][6][7][8][9][10] In contrast, blue and bluegreen LEDs provide high-intensity monochromatic light of a relatively narrow wavelength band compared to the previously tested blue or green spectrum phototherapy devices. Thus, the use of LEDs allows, for the first time, clinical investigation of specific spectral components of the commonly used polychromatic lamps.…”

“…It is still controversial whether the use of green light has any advantage over blue light. [4][5][6][7][8][9][10] This disparity may be attributed, in part, to the fact that the previous studies have compared light sources that generate relatively broadspectrum light. Furthermore, inappropriate radiometry may have been used, thereby confounding the standardization of irradiance measurement.…”