Effects of Electric Currents on Bone In Vivo

Bassett, C. Andrew L.; Pawluk, Robert J.; Becker, Robert O.

doi:10.1038/204652a0

Cited by 502 publications

(193 citation statements)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

187

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…None of these systems has, to our knowledge, been shown to be more effective than any other. Using direct current, several authors have found that bone is formed in the vicinity of the cathode (Bassett et al 1964, Friedenberg et al 1970, 1974. Similar results, but significant only when calculating bone production by 85-Sr uptake, have recently been reported by .…”

Section: Torbjornsupporting

confidence: 68%

Electrical treatment of non-united fractures

Ahl

Andersson

Herberts³

et al. 1984

Acta Orthopaedica Scandinavica

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Torbjornsupporting

confidence: 68%

Electrical treatment of non-united fractures

Ahl

Andersson

Herberts³

et al. 1984

Acta Orthopaedica Scandinavica

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Epker and Frost are responsible for a well-known version of this theory, which states that the alveolar bone wall at the tension side bends decreasing its radius of curvature, causing bone compression which results in apposition and resorption (as a result of a regional acceleratory phenomenon) (Epker & Frost, 1965). Experiments in dog mandibles also showed that in areas of PDL tension the bone assumes a concave shape, whereas in compression areas it tends to assume a convex shape (Bassett & Becker, 1962;Bassett, Pawluk & Becker, 1964;Krishnan & Davidovitch, 2006;Zengo et al, 1974;Zengo, Pawluk & Bassett, 1973). According to this theory, the resulting apposition and resorption processes in orthodontics would then be consistent with known orthopedic behavior of long bones.…”

Section: Orthodontic Mechanotransductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Orthodontic mechanotransduction and the role of the P2X7 receptor

Viecilli

Katona

Chen

et al. 2009

American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

DEDICATIONTo my parents, who have supported my education. iv ACKNOWLEDGMENTSOne of the most important things I have learned during my PhD is the necessity of the existence of a working network of people that can help you achieve your goals. The more effectively this network functions, the higher the chance you will achieve the goals quickly.I would first like to thank my parents, who have unconditionally supported my decision to abandon a profitable private practice in Orthodontics, and return to humble student conditions while aiming for a full time academic career.I also thank my girlfriend Laura Kruter who has (almost always) been ok with my, some might say, not very sane ideas. Sometimes they do turn out fine, though (like this "PhD" one).I can hardly think of anyone else that could have complemented my work and ideas during this Program as well as Dr. Thomas Katona. While I was passionately conditioned to an idea, he was always rational and careful. While I was sometimes furious with a shortcoming, he was always temperate and humorous. When I ran into his office with some news about a project, he would always listen and almost never seem too busy to see me. While I was working and something went wrong, he would listen and wonder with me about the "whys" and "hows", instead of telling me what to do or express disappointment. He was even subject to some of my home culinary experiments. I was extremely fortunate to find someone that thought about science the same way I did, and that actually helped me with my project instead of just telling me what to do. I felt like we worked as a team, and that helped to increase my motivation during my studies. The third part of this project tested the role of the P2X7 receptor in the dentoalveolar morphology of C57B/6 mice. P2X7R KO (knockout) mice were compared to C57B/6 WT to identify differences in a maxillary molar and bone. Tooth dimensions viii were measured and 3D bone morphometry was conducted. No statistically significant differences were found between the two mouse types. P2X7R does not have a major effect on alveolar bone or tooth morphology.The final part examines the role of the P2X7 receptor in a controlled biomechanical model. Orthodontic mechanotransduction was compared in wild-type (WT) and P2X7R knock-out (KO) mice. Using Finite Element Analysis, mouse mechanics were scaled to produce typical human stress levels. Relationships between the biological responses and the calculated stresses were statistically tested and compared.There were direct relationships between certain stress magnitudes and root resorption and bone formation. Hyalinization and root and bone resorption were different in WT and KO. Orthodontic responses are related to the principal stress patterns in the PDL and the P2X7 receptor plays a significant role in their mechanotransduction.

show abstract

“…The potential use of electrical stimulation for bone healing first came from the observations of bone tissue electrical properties by Yasuda, Bassett, and Becker in the 1950s and 1960s [2,3,68]. When bone is mechanically strained, electrical potentials are generated; electronegative potentials are found in areas of compression and electropositive potentials in areas of tension.…”

Section: Mechanisms Of Actionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Electrical stimulation therapies for spinal fusions: current concepts

Gan

Glazer

2006

Eur Spine J

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Electrical stimulation therapies have been used for more than 30 years to enhance spinal fusions. Although their positive effects on spinal fusions have been widely reported, the mechanisms of action of the technologies were only recently identified. Three types of technologies are available clinically: direct current, capacitive coupling, and inductive coupling. The latter is the basis of pulsed electromagnetic fields and combined magnetic fields. This review summarizes the current concepts on the mechanisms of action, animal and clinical studies, and cost justification for the use of electrical stimulation for spinal fusions. Scientific studies support the validity of electrical stimulation treatments. The mechanisms of action of each of the three electrical stimulation therapies are different. New data demonstrates that the upregulation of several growth factors may be responsible for the clinical success seen with the use of such technologies.

show abstract

Effects of Electric Currents on Bone In Vivo

Cited by 502 publications

References 6 publications

Electrical treatment of non-united fractures

Electrical treatment of non-united fractures

Orthodontic mechanotransduction and the role of the P2X7 receptor

Electrical stimulation therapies for spinal fusions: current concepts

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About