Literature DB >> 26225010

Radiodensitometric Assessment of the Effect of Pulsed Electromagnetic Field Stimulation Versus Low Intensity Laser Irradiation on Mandibular Fracture Repair: A Preliminary Clinical Trial.

Hamida Refai1, Dalia Radwan1, Nermeen Hassanien1.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Closed reduction of mandibular fractures usually entails a relatively long period of immobilization, with the subsequent delay of rehabilitation. Therefore, shorter immobilization period with various approaches to protect or enhance bone healing have been investigated. The aim of this study was to analyze the effects of pulsed electromagnetic field (PEMF) and low intensity laser irradiation (LILI) on the fracture healing process, through radiodensitometric assessment of the bone callus. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Eighteen patients with mandibular fractures at the tooth bearing area participated in this prospective study. They were treated by closed reduction using maxillo-mandibular fixation (MMF) and were consecutively assigned into 1 of 3 groups. In group A, the fracture sites were exposed to PEMF for 2 h daily for 12 days. In group B, the fracture sites were exposed to LILI on the tenth and twelfth postoperative days (2 sessions of 6 min per day 2 h apart). The fracture sites in group C acted as controls. MMF was maintained for 2 weeks in group A and 4 weeks in groups B and C. The bone fracture healing was evaluated clinically by investigating the union of the fractured segments and radiographically using computerized densitometry. The union of the fractured segments was tested by manual manipulation and the occlusion was assessed upon removal of MMF. Standardized digital panoramic radiographs were performed for each patient, immediately postoperatively as well as at 2 and 4 weeks. The digital images were manipulated using the IDRISI software. A rectangular area of 10 × 15 mm was drawn along the center of the fracture line. The obtained densitometry values were expressed in gray levels from 0 to 256. The collected data were then tabulated and statistically analyzed.
RESULTS: After releasing the MMF, the bimanual mobility test of the fractured segments in all patients showed stability of the segments. The preinjury occlusion was maintained in all patients. The postoperative radiographs of all patients revealed good bony alignment of the bony segments. In all groups, comparison between the study intervals with respect to both means and changes percentages of the bone density values showed insignificant differences. At 2nd postoperative week, the mean bone density at the fracture sites decreased by 4.74, 6.6 and 27.89 % in groups A, B and C respectively. The period from the 2nd to the 4th postoperative weeks showed increase in the bone density by 1.49, 1.95 and 14.12 % in groups A, B and C respectively. Insignificant difference was found between the means of bone densities of group A and B throughout the study intervals. On the other hand, both groups showed insignificant difference with group C immediately postoperative and significant increase in bone density at the 2nd and 4th postoperative weeks.
CONCLUSIONS: Short period immobilization of mandibular fractures for 2 weeks supplemented with PEMF is recommended. Further studies are needed to evaluate the efficacy of LILI as a supplement to reduce the mandibular fracture immobilization period.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Low intensity laser irradiation; Mandibular fracture; Pulsed electromagnetic field therapy

Year:  2013        PMID: 26225010      PMCID: PMC4518795          DOI: 10.1007/s12663-013-0551-2

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Maxillofac Oral Surg        ISSN: 0972-8270


  29 in total

1.  Rigid internal fixation vs. traditional techniques for the treatment of mandible fractures.

Authors:  W Y Hoffman; R M Barton; M Price; S J Mathes
Journal:  J Trauma       Date:  1990-08

2.  The efficacy of ununited tibial fracture treatment using pulsing electromagnetic fields: relation to biological activity on nonunion bone ends.

Authors:  H Ito; Y Shirai
Journal:  J Nippon Med Sch       Date:  2001-04       Impact factor: 0.920

Review 3.  The enhancement of bone regeneration by ultrasound.

Authors:  Lutz Claes; Bettina Willie
Journal:  Prog Biophys Mol Biol       Date:  2006-08-10       Impact factor: 3.667

4.  A short period of maxillomandibular fixation for treatment of fractures of the mandibular tooth-bearing area.

Authors:  Fouad A Al-Belasy
Journal:  J Oral Maxillofac Surg       Date:  2005-07       Impact factor: 1.895

5.  Comparative analysis of the effectiveness of the mandibular angle fracture treatment methods.

Authors:  Dainius Razukevicius; Gintautas Sabalys; Ricardas Kubilius
Journal:  Stomatologija       Date:  2005

6.  The immobilization period for fractures of the mandibular body.

Authors:  R P Juniper; M D Awty
Journal:  Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol       Date:  1973-08

7.  Comparative study of how low-level laser therapy and low-intensity pulsed ultrasound affect bone repair in rats.

Authors:  Ana Paula Lirani-Galvão; Vanda Jorgetti; Orivaldo Lopes da Silva
Journal:  Photomed Laser Surg       Date:  2006-12       Impact factor: 2.796

8.  Differentiation of human osteoprogenitor cells increases after treatment with pulsed electromagnetic fields.

Authors:  Marco Esposito; Angela Lucariello; Ilaria Riccio; Vincenzo Riccio; Vincenzo Esposito; Giovanni Riccardi
Journal:  In Vivo       Date:  2012 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 2.155

9.  Effect of lower-level laser therapy on rabbit tibial fracture.

Authors:  Xuecheng Liu; Roger Lyon; Heidi T Meier; John Thometz; Steven T Haworth
Journal:  Photomed Laser Surg       Date:  2007-12       Impact factor: 2.796

10.  The effects of pulsed electromagnetism on fresh fracture healing: osteochondral repair in the rat femoral groove.

Authors:  K L Grace; W J Revell; M Brookes
Journal:  Orthopedics       Date:  1998-03       Impact factor: 1.390

View more
  3 in total

1.  Carpal scaphoid non-union treatment: a retrospective trial comparing simple retrograde percutaneous screw fixation versus percutaneous screw fixation plus pulsed electromagnetic fields (Physiostim®).

Authors:  Alexis Pereira; Juan José Hidalgo Díaz; Maurise Saur; Santiago Salazar Botero; Sybille Facca; Philippe Liverneaux
Journal:  Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol       Date:  2017-04-11

Review 2.  The Use of Pulsed Electromagnetic Fields to Promote Bone Responses to Biomaterials In Vitro and In Vivo.

Authors:  Carlo Galli; Giuseppe Pedrazzi; Monica Mattioli-Belmonte; Stefano Guizzardi
Journal:  Int J Biomater       Date:  2018-09-03

3.  Pulsed Electromagnetic Field Affects the Development of Postmenopausal Osteoporotic Women with Vertebral Fractures.

Authors:  Wei Liu; Xiao Jin; Zhiqiang Guan; Qiyun Zhou
Journal:  Biomed Res Int       Date:  2021-07-16       Impact factor: 3.411

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.