Literature DB >> 12584038

Low-intensity, high-frequency vibration appears to prevent the decrease in strength of the femur and tibia associated with ovariectomy of adult rats.

B S Oxlund1, G Ørtoft, T T Andreassen, H Oxlund.   

Abstract

The effect of low-intensity, high-frequency vibration on bone mass, bone strength, and skeletal muscle mass was studied in an adult ovariectomized (OVX) rat model. One-year-old female rats were allocated randomly to the following groups: start control, sham OVX, OVX without vibration, OVX with vibration at 17 Hz (0.5g), OVX with vibration at 30 Hz (1.5g), OVX with vibration at 45 Hz (3.0g). Vibrations were given 30 min/day for 90 days. During vibration each group of rats was placed in a box on top of the vibration motor. The amplitude of the vibration motor was 1.0 mm. The animals were labeled with calcein at day 63 and with tetracycline at day 84. The tibia middiaphysis was studied by mechanical testing and dynamic histomorphometry and the femur distal metaphysis by mechanical compression. OVX without vibration increased the periosteal bone formation rate and increased the medullary cross-sectional area, i.e., increased the endocortical resorption and outward anteromedial and lateral drifts of cortical bone at the tibia middiaphysis. OVX also resulted in a reduced maximum bending stress of the tibia diaphysis and a reduced compressive stress of the femur distal metaphysis. Vibration at the highest intensity, i.e., 45 Hz, of OVX rats induced a further increase in periosteal bone formation rate and inhibited the endocortical resorption seen in OVX rats. Furthermore, vibration at 45 Hz inhibited the decline in maximum bending stress and compressive stress induced by OVX. Neither OVX nor OVX with vibration influenced skeletal muscle mass. In conclusion, the results support the idea of a possible beneficial effect of passive physical loading on the preservation of bone in OVX animals.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2003        PMID: 12584038     DOI: 10.1016/s8756-3282(02)00916-x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Bone        ISSN: 1873-2763            Impact factor:   4.398


  47 in total

1.  Mechanical vibration inhibits osteoclast formation by reducing DC-STAMP receptor expression in osteoclast precursor cells.

Authors:  Rishikesh N Kulkarni; Philip A Voglewede; Dawei Liu
Journal:  Bone       Date:  2013-08-28       Impact factor: 4.398

2.  Osteogenic potentials with joint-loading modality.

Authors:  Hiroki Yokota; Shigeo M Tanaka
Journal:  J Bone Miner Metab       Date:  2005       Impact factor: 2.626

3.  Low-magnitude whole body vibration does not affect bone mass but does affect weight in ovariectomized rats.

Authors:  Olav P van der Jagt; Jacqueline C van der Linden; Jan H Waarsing; Jan A N Verhaar; Harrie Weinans
Journal:  J Bone Miner Metab       Date:  2011-07-20       Impact factor: 2.626

Review 4.  Vibration stimuli and the differentiation of musculoskeletal progenitor cells: Review of results in vitro and in vivo.

Authors:  Jennifer Helen Edwards; Gwendolen Clair Reilly
Journal:  World J Stem Cells       Date:  2015-04-26       Impact factor: 5.326

Review 5.  Combating osteoporosis and obesity with exercise: leveraging cell mechanosensitivity.

Authors:  Gabriel M Pagnotti; Maya Styner; Gunes Uzer; Vihitaben S Patel; Laura E Wright; Kirsten K Ness; Theresa A Guise; Janet Rubin; Clinton T Rubin
Journal:  Nat Rev Endocrinol       Date:  2019-06       Impact factor: 43.330

6.  Whole-body vibration and resistance exercise prevent long-term hindlimb unloading-induced bone loss: independent and interactive effects.

Authors:  Zhili Li; Cheng Tan; Yonghua Wu; Ye Ding; Huijuan Wang; Wenjuan Chen; Yu Zhu; Honglei Ma; Honghui Yang; Wenbin Liang; Shizhong Jiang; Desheng Wang; Linjie Wang; Guohua Tang; Jun Wang
Journal:  Eur J Appl Physiol       Date:  2012-02-28       Impact factor: 3.078

7.  The effects of vibration loading on adipose stem cell number, viability and differentiation towards bone-forming cells.

Authors:  Laura Tirkkonen; Heidi Halonen; Jari Hyttinen; Hannu Kuokkanen; Harri Sievänen; Anna-Maija Koivisto; Bettina Mannerström; George K B Sándor; Riitta Suuronen; Susanna Miettinen; Suvi Haimi
Journal:  J R Soc Interface       Date:  2011-05-25       Impact factor: 4.118

8.  Cell Mechanosensitivity to Extremely Low-Magnitude Signals Is Enabled by a LINCed Nucleus.

Authors:  Gunes Uzer; William R Thompson; Buer Sen; Zhihui Xie; Sherwin S Yen; Sean Miller; Guniz Bas; Maya Styner; Clinton T Rubin; Stefan Judex; Keith Burridge; Janet Rubin
Journal:  Stem Cells       Date:  2015-06       Impact factor: 6.277

9.  Musculoskeletal response to whole-body vibration during fracture healing in intact and ovariectomized rats.

Authors:  Ewa K Stuermer; Marina Komrakova; Carsten Werner; Michael Wicke; Leila Kolios; Stephan Sehmisch; Mohammad Tezval; Clara Utesch; Orzala Mangal; Sebastian Zimmer; Christian Dullin; Klaus M Stuermer
Journal:  Calcif Tissue Int       Date:  2010-06-09       Impact factor: 4.333

10.  Separating Fluid Shear Stress from Acceleration during Vibrations in Vitro: Identification of Mechanical Signals Modulating the Cellular Response.

Authors:  Gunes Uzer; Sarah L Manske; M Ete Chan; Fu-Pen Chiang; Clinton T Rubin; Mary D Frame; Stefan Judex
Journal:  Cell Mol Bioeng       Date:  2012-05-09       Impact factor: 2.321

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.