Electromagnetic effects on bone formation at implants in the medullary canal in rabbits

Abstract

This experiment was aimed at illuminating the relationship between electromagnetic and mechanical stimuli of bone formation when present simultaneously. Movable and stationary intramedullary wire implants were studied in rabbits treated with a pulsing electromagnetic field (PEMF) 4 h/day for 3 weeks, and were compared with identical control animals without PEMF. Trabecular bone formed routinely at spontaneously movable implants, but not at stationary ones. On average, PEMF-treated movable implants in the femur induced 44% more bone than untreated movable implants. Also, in the PEMF-treated femora, a 22% enlargement of the area of the medullary canal was observed compared with no-field controls. In the tibia, these effects were weak or nonexistent. The PEMF used did not induce bone at stationary implants, suggesting that under these conditions it is not a primary trigger in vivo.

Evaluation of the effect of pulsed electromagnetic fields on osseointegration of immediate dental implants

“…Increased radiodensity around orthopedic implants enhanced by PEMFs has been reported in previous studies [24][25][26]. In the current study there was a statistically significant increase in radiodensity around enhanced bone in the study group.…”

“…Regarding osseointegration, several animal and human studies have been published, discussing the effect of the clinical use of PEMFs on orthopedic implants to stimulate osseointegration, with most of them proving its beneficial effect [5,[23][24][25][26][27].…”

Effects of pulsed electromagnetic stimulation on patients undergoing hip revision prostheses: A randomized prospective double‐blind study

“…Periprosthetic osteogenesis can be promoted by several forms of biophysical stimulation, such as electromagnetic fields and low intensity pulsed ultrasounds, initially developed to accelerate fracture healing [Fini et al, 2004]. In particular, PEMF stimulation has been investigated in animal models for the improvement of biomaterial osteointegration [Shimizu et al, 1988;Spadaro et al, 1990;Ijiri et al, 1996;Matsumoto et al, 2000;Ottani et al, 2002;Buzza et al, 2003;Fini et al, 2006]. Almost all these studies have shown that PEMF stimulation can be applied locally and can significantly enhance the osteointegration of titanium alloy, stainless steel and ceramic implants in the skeletal system [Shimizu et al, 1988;Spadaro et al, 1990;Ijiri et al, 1996;Matsumoto et al, 2000;Fini et al, 2002;Ottani et al, 2002;Fini et al, 2006].…”

“…Almost all these studies have shown that PEMF stimulation can be applied locally and can significantly enhance the osteointegration of titanium alloy, stainless steel and ceramic implants in the skeletal system [Shimizu et al, 1988;Spadaro et al, 1990;Ijiri et al, 1996;Matsumoto et al, 2000;Fini et al, 2002;Ottani et al, 2002;Fini et al, 2006]. Spadaro et al [1990] studied bone response around both stable and unstable intramedullary nails. After observing a particular response to PEMF stimulation in movable implants, the authors suggest, albeit with caution, that their results may be transferred to clinical application in loosened orthopedic implants [Spadaro et al, 1990].…”

Induced angiogenesis with intramedullary direct current: experimental research

“…It was hypothesized that hypoxia caused by muscle contraction was relevant to the increase of capillary density of skeletal muscles (12). Electromagnetic fields have also been used to stimulate cells in culture (5,8,19). Despite successful results with previous studies, we do not prefer this technique because there is no intramedullary application.…”