S Judex1, T J Koh, L Xie. 1. Department of Biomedical Engineering, Stony Brook University, Bioengineering Building, Rm 213, Stony Brook, NY, 11794-5281, USA, stefan.judex@stonybrook.edu.
Abstract
UNLABELLED: Variables defining vibration-based biomechanical treatments were tested by their ability to affect the musculoskeleton in the growing mouse. Duration of a vibration bout, but not variations in vibration intensity or number of vibration bouts per day, was identified as modulator of trabecular bone formation rates. INTRODUCTION: Low-intensity vibrations (LIV) may enhance musculoskeletal properties, but little is known regarding the role that individual LIV variables play. We determined whether acceleration magnitude and/or the number and duration of daily loading bouts may modulate LIV efficacy. METHODS: LIV was applied to 8-week-old mice at either 0.3 g or 0.6 g for three weeks; the number of daily bouts was one, two, or four, and the duration of a single bout was 15, 30, or 60 min. A frequency of 45 Hz was used throughout. RESULTS: LIV induced tibial cortical surface strains in 4-month-old mice of approximately 10 με at 0.3 g and 30 με at 0.6 g. In trabecular bone of the proximal tibial metaphysis, all single daily bout signal combinations with the exception of a single 15 min daily bout at 0.3 g (i.e., single bouts of 30 and 60 min at 0.3 g and 15 and 30 min at 0.6 g) produced greater bone formation rates (BFR/BS) than in controls. Across all signal combinations, 30 and 60 min bouts were significantly more effective than 15 min bouts in raising BFR/BS above control levels. Increasing the number of daily bouts or partitioning a single daily bout into several shorter bouts did not potentiate efficacy and in some instances led to BFR/BS that was not significantly different from those in controls. Bone chemical and muscle properties were similar across all groups. CONCLUSIONS: These data may provide a basis towards optimization of LIV efficacy and indicate that in the growing mouse skeleton, increasing bout duration from 15 to 30 or 60 min positively influences BFR/BS.
UNLABELLED: Variables defining vibration-based biomechanical treatments were tested by their ability to affect the musculoskeleton in the growing mouse. Duration of a vibration bout, but not variations in vibration intensity or number of vibration bouts per day, was identified as modulator of trabecular bone formation rates. INTRODUCTION: Low-intensity vibrations (LIV) may enhance musculoskeletal properties, but little is known regarding the role that individual LIV variables play. We determined whether acceleration magnitude and/or the number and duration of daily loading bouts may modulate LIV efficacy. METHODS: LIV was applied to 8-week-old mice at either 0.3 g or 0.6 g for three weeks; the number of daily bouts was one, two, or four, and the duration of a single bout was 15, 30, or 60 min. A frequency of 45 Hz was used throughout. RESULTS: LIV induced tibial cortical surface strains in 4-month-old mice of approximately 10 με at 0.3 g and 30 με at 0.6 g. In trabecular bone of the proximal tibial metaphysis, all single daily bout signal combinations with the exception of a single 15 min daily bout at 0.3 g (i.e., single bouts of 30 and 60 min at 0.3 g and 15 and 30 min at 0.6 g) produced greater bone formation rates (BFR/BS) than in controls. Across all signal combinations, 30 and 60 min bouts were significantly more effective than 15 min bouts in raising BFR/BS above control levels. Increasing the number of daily bouts or partitioning a single daily bout into several shorter bouts did not potentiate efficacy and in some instances led to BFR/BS that was not significantly different from those in controls. Bone chemical and muscle properties were similar across all groups. CONCLUSIONS: These data may provide a basis towards optimization of LIV efficacy and indicate that in the growing mouse skeleton, increasing bout duration from 15 to 30 or 60 min positively influences BFR/BS.
Authors: Liqin Xie; Jeffrey M Jacobson; Edna S Choi; Bhavin Busa; Leah Rae Donahue; Lisa M Miller; Clinton T Rubin; Stefan Judex Journal: Bone Date: 2006-07-07 Impact factor: 4.398
Authors: Lubomira Slatkovska; Shabbir M H Alibhai; Joseph Beyene; Hanxian Hu; Alice Demaras; Angela M Cheung Journal: Ann Intern Med Date: 2011-11-15 Impact factor: 25.391
Authors: Dana M DiPasquale; Ming Cheng; William Billich; Sharon A Huang; Nico van Rooijen; Troy A Hornberger; Timothy J Koh Journal: Am J Physiol Cell Physiol Date: 2007-07-25 Impact factor: 4.249
Authors: Gunes Uzer; Suphannee Pongkitwitoon; Cheng Ian; William R Thompson; Janet Rubin; Meilin E Chan; Stefan Judex Journal: PLoS One Date: 2014-03-10 Impact factor: 3.240