| Literature DB >> 25143937 |
Benedicta E Beck-Broichsitter1, Androniki Lamia2, Stefano Geuna3, Federica Fregnan3, Ralf Smeets1, Stephan T Becker4, Nektarios Sinis2.
Abstract
The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of pulsed magnetic field therapy on peripheral nerve regeneration after median nerve injury and primary coaptation in the rat. Both median nerves were surgically exposed and denervated in 24 female Wistar rats. A microsurgical coaptation was performed on the right side, whereas on the left side a spontaneous healing was prevented. The study group underwent a daily pulsed magnetic field therapy; the other group served as a control group. The grasping force was recorded 2 weeks after the surgical intervention for a period of 12 weeks. The right median nerve was excised and histologically examined. The histomorphometric data and the functional assessments were analyzed by t-test statistics and one-way ANOVA. One-way ANOVA indicated a statistically significant influence of group affiliation and grasping force (P = 0.0078). Grasping strength was higher on a significant level in the experimental group compared to the control group permanently from the 9th week to the end of the study. T-test statistics revealed a significantly higher weight of the flexor digitorum sublimis muscle (P = 0.0385) in the experimental group. The histological evaluation did not reveal any statistically significant differences concerning the histomorphometric parameters. Our results suggest that the pulsed magnetic field therapy has a positive influence on the functional aspects of neural regeneration. More studies are needed to precisely evaluate and optimize the intensity and duration of the application.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2014 PMID: 25143937 PMCID: PMC4131097 DOI: 10.1155/2014/401760
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Biomed Res Int Impact factor: 3.411
Figure 1Scheme of surgical protocol. Both median nerves were exposed and denervated. The right median nerve was mircrosurgically coapted. Spontaneous healing on the left side was prevented by excision.
Figure 2The drawing displays the rat's anatomy of the upper extremity (adopted from Greene 1935) [17]. The arrow points in the area of denervation.
Mean-values and standard deviations of grasping force during the observation period are compared for every single measurement. P value indicated statistically significant differences in favor of the experimental group in the 9th week to the end of the observation period.
| Time point | Magnetic field | Control |
| ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mean-value | Standard deviation | Mean-value | Standard deviation | ||
| 1 | 87.44 | 34.76 | 64.33 | 23.16 | 0.0683 |
| 2 | 118.33 | 59.86 | 72.28 | 17.72 |
|
| 3 | 111.69 | 27.62 | 134.47 | 39.33 | 0.1149 |
| 4 | 128.36 | 39.94 | 189.14 | 42.41 |
|
| 5 | 156.22 | 38.11 | 154.58 | 40.52 | 0.9196 |
| 6 | 140.81 | 33.07 | 168.39 | 38.33 | 0.0724 |
| 7 | 168.53 | 36.5 | 177.14 | 39.44 | 0.5844 |
| 8 | 166.89 | 33.96 | 141.81 | 25.71 | 0.0536 |
| 9 | 202.33 | 62.13 | 143.11 | 20.78 |
|
| 10 | 233.31 | 81.34 | 141.03 | 35.24 |
|
| 11 | 258.89 | 88.93 | 187.78 | 28.86 |
|
| 12 | 238.06 | 72.17 | 175.17 | 40.58 |
|
Figure 3Development of grasping force during the study comparing the study group receiving a pulsed magnetic field therapy and the control group. Since the 7th measurement grasping strength in the group of magnetic field therapy increases on a higher level compared to the control group. Statistical analysis between both groups revealed statistically significant differences from the 9th measurement to the end of the observation period in favor for the experimental group.
Figure 4Comparison of the flexor digitorum sublimis muscle weight between study group and control group indicates a significantly higher weight in favor of the experimental group (P = 0.0385).
When comparing histomorphometric parameters between both experimental and control group no statistically significant differences could be determined.
| Group | Total Number | Density (fibers/mm2) | Area (mm2) | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mean | SD | Mean | SD | Mean | SD | |
| Magnetic Field | 6517 | 3265 | 17646 | 7374 | 0.3916 | 0.2137 |
| Control | 5291 | 2248 | 21022 | 10853 | 0.2718 | 0.0707 |
|
| 0.509 | 0.581 | 0.268 | |||
When comparing histomorphometric parameters between both experimental and control group no statistically significant differences could be determined.
| Group | Axon Diameter | Nerve Fibre Diameter | Myelin Thickness | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mean | SD | Mean | SD | Mean | SD | |
| Magnetic Field | 2.47 | 0.33 | 3.65 | 0.21 | 1.32 | 0.65 |
| Control | 2.28 | 0.24 | 3.62 | 0.35 | 1.05 | 0.51 |
|
| 0.341 | 0.912 | 0.485 | |||