Effects of combined treatment with ibandronate and pulsed electromagnetic field on ovariectomy‐induced osteoporosis in rats

Abstract

Ibandronate (IBN) and pulsed electromagnetic field (PEMF) have each shown positive effects for treating osteoporosis, but no study has evaluated the relative effects of these treatments combined. This study investigated the effects of IBN þ PEMF on bone turnover, mineral density, microarchitecture, and biomechanical properties in an ovariectomized (OVX) rat model of osteoporosis. Fifty 3-month-old rats were randomly apportioned to receive a sham-operation (n ¼ 10), or ovariectomy (n ¼ 40). The latter group was equally divided as the model (OVX control) or to receive IBN, PEMF, or IBN þ PEMF. Beginning the day after surgery, the IBN and IBN þ PEMF groups received weekly subcutaneous IBN; the PEMF and IBN þ PEMF groups were given daily PEMF during the same 12 weeks. After 12 weeks of treatments, biochemical parameters, bone mineral density (BMD), microarchitecture parameters, biomechanical properties, and some metabolic modulators that are involved in bone resorption were compared. The L5 lumbar vertebral body BMDs of the IBN, PEMF, and IBN þ PEMF groups were 121.6%, 119.5%, and 139.6%; maximum loads were 111.4%, 112.7%, and 121.9%; and energy to failure was 130.8%, 129.2%, and 154.9% of the OVX model, respectively. The IBN þ PEMF group had significantly lower levels of serum tartrate-resistant acid phosphatase 5b, and greater improvement in BMD, bone microarchitecture, and strength of the lumbar spine compared with monotherapy groups. Results showed that IBN þ PEMF had a more favorable effect on the lumbar spine in this osteoporosis model than did either monotherapy. Bioelectromagnetics. 38:31-40, 2017.

Translational Insights into Extremely Low Frequency Pulsed Electromagnetic Fields (ELF-PEMFs) for Bone Regeneration after Trauma and Orthopedic Surgery

“…However, this assumption requires further investigation. Examples are the studies of Cai et al [82], Li et al [83], or Jing et al [84], which investigated the effect of ELF-PEMF on architecture and mechanical properties of bone in diabetic animals, known to have skeletal deficiencies, or the studies of Lei et al [74,85], Li et al [86], Zhou et al [87,88], or Androjna et al [89], which investigated the effect of ELF-PEMF on bone quality in osteoporotic animals.…”

Effects of pulsed electromagnetic fields on postmenopausal osteoporosis

“…Moreover, results from our research group [Zhou et al, , ] demonstrated that PEMFs with the parameters of 8 Hz and 3.8 mT (40 min/day, 5 days/week for 12 weeks) could mitigate the deterioration of bone microarchitecture and strength, as was evidenced by histological and biomechanical analyses. Meanwhile, other research groups also reported that PEMFs with the same parameters (8 Hz, 3.8 mT, 40 min/day, 5 days/week for 12 weeks) had the same beneficial effect via significantly increasing BMD (DEXA), bone mechanical properties, and parameters of µCT (including trabecular bone volume ratio, trabecular number, trabecular thickness, and separation) in streptozotocin‐ and ovariectomy‐induced bone loss, respectively [Zhou et al, , ]. However, it was suggested in a study [van der Jagt et al, ] that the efficacy of PEMFs with the parameters of 15 Hz and 1 G (2 h/day for 3–6 weeks) might be a source of controversy since micro‐CT scanning could not detect any changes in cancellous or cortical bone relative to the untreated controls.…”

“…It has been proven that PEMFs could not only significantly increase OPG, but could also reduce the activation of IL‐1β‐induced NF‐kB p65 subunit through activating anti‐inflammatory effects of ARs, as described above [Vincenzi et al, ]. Also, 8 Hz and 3.8 mT PEMFs might prevent ovariectomy‐induced bone loss through suppressing the expression of RANKL while improving that of OPG in lumbar, femur, and tibia, respectively [Zhou et al, , ]. Furthermore, a study in vitro [He et al, ] found that PEMFs inhibited the expression of carbonic anhydrase II (CA II) that regulated the resorptive activity of osteoclasts and nuclear factor of activated T‐cells, cytoplasmic 1 (NFATc1), which acted as a key transcription factor in OPG/RANK/RANKL signaling and RANK during the induction of osteoclast‐like cells.…”

The cellular effects of Pulsed Electromagnetic Fields on osteoblasts: A review

“…The use of EMFs to promote bone healing is supported by abundant preclinical literature that shows their action in rodent models of glucocorticoid‐ or ovariectomy‐induced osteoporosis [Zati et al, ; Bilotta et al, ; Chang and Chang, ; Jing et al, , ; Zhou et al, , , , b; Jiang et al, ; Lei et al, ], disuse osteoporosis [Shen and Zhao, ; Jing et al, ; Li et al, ], osteoporotic fractures [Androjna et al, ], osteoarthritis [Yang et al, ], diabetes‐associated bone architecture [Li et al, ], hyperthyroidism bone loss [Liu et al, ], and bone healing [Takano‐Yamamoto et al, ; Sarker et al, ; Landry et al, ; Fredericks et al, ; Midura et al, ; Taylor et al, ; Bilgin et al, ; Huegel et al, ].…”