文献检索文档翻译深度研究
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
邀请有礼套餐&价格历史记录

新学期,新优惠

限时优惠:9月1日-9月22日

30天高级会员仅需29元

1天体验卡首发特惠仅需5.99元

了解详情
不再提醒
插件&应用
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
高级版
套餐订阅购买积分包
AI 工具
文献检索文档翻译深度研究
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2025

直流电刺激和脉冲电磁场对器械辅助下腰椎后外侧融合术效果的前瞻性比较。

Prospective comparison of the effect of direct current electrical stimulation and pulsed electromagnetic fields on instrumented posterolateral lumbar arthrodesis.

作者信息

Jenis L G, An H S, Stein R, Young B

机构信息

New England Baptist Spine Center, Boston, Massachusetts 02120, USA.

出版信息

J Spinal Disord. 2000 Aug;13(4):290-6. doi: 10.1097/00002517-200008000-00004.


DOI:10.1097/00002517-200008000-00004
PMID:10941887
Abstract

The purpose of this prospective study was to compare the effect of adjunctive direct current (DC) electrical stimulation and pulsed electromagnetic field therapy (PEMF) on augmentation of instrumented lumbar fusion. Sixty-one patients undergoing lumbar spine fusion were enrolled in the study and randomized to one of three treatment protocols: 1) adjunctive PEMF group (n = 22) fitted with Spinal-Stim model 8212(AME) within 30 days of surgery; 2) DC group (n = 17) had a SpF-2T stimulator(EBI) implanted at the time of surgery; or 3) control group (n = 22). The fusion mass bone mineral density (BMD) assessment was performed on 3-month and 1-year radiographs for each patient. Lateral flexion-extension and anteroposterior radiographs were evaluated at 1 year to determine the presence of fusion. Clinical outcome patient analyses were performed at 1 year. At 1-year follow-up, radiographic fusion and fusion mass bone density were not significantly different among the groups. In the nonstimulated group, there were 43% excellent, 43% good, and 14% fair results. In the PEMF group, there were 35% excellent, 50% good, 10% fair, and 5% poor results. In the DC group, there were 32% excellent, 37% good, and 31% fair results. The results of the current study suggest that electrical stimulation does not significantly enhance fusion rate in instrumented lumbar arthrodesis, although we observed a statistically insignificant trend toward increased fusion mass BMD in the electrically stimulated groups. The significance of increased BMD remains unknown.

摘要

这项前瞻性研究的目的是比较辅助直流电(DC)电刺激和脉冲电磁场疗法(PEMF)对器械辅助腰椎融合术效果的影响。61例接受腰椎融合术的患者被纳入研究,并随机分为三种治疗方案之一:1)辅助PEMF组(n = 22),在术后30天内安装Spinal-Stim 8212型(AME);2)DC组(n = 17),在手术时植入SpF-2T刺激器(EBI);或3)对照组(n = 22)。对每位患者在术后3个月和1年的X光片上进行融合块骨密度(BMD)评估。在1年时评估腰椎侧屈-后伸位和前后位X光片以确定融合情况。在1年时进行临床结局患者分析。在1年随访时,各组之间的影像学融合和融合块骨密度无显著差异。在未刺激组中,结果为优的占43%,良的占43%,可的占14%。在PEMF组中,结果为优的占35%,良的占50%,可的占10%,差的占5%。在DC组中,结果为优的占32%,良的占37%,可的占31%。本研究结果表明,电刺激并不能显著提高器械辅助腰椎融合术的融合率,尽管我们观察到在电刺激组中融合块骨密度有增加的趋势,但在统计学上无显著意义。骨密度增加的意义尚不清楚。

相似文献

[1]
Prospective comparison of the effect of direct current electrical stimulation and pulsed electromagnetic fields on instrumented posterolateral lumbar arthrodesis.

J Spinal Disord. 2000-8

[2]
Randomized, prospective, and controlled clinical trial of pulsed electromagnetic field stimulation for cervical fusion.

Spine J. 2008

[3]
Pseudarthrosis after lumbar spine fusion: nonoperative salvage with pulsed electromagnetic fields.

Am J Orthop (Belle Mead NJ). 2004-1

[4]
The effect of pulsed electromagnetic fields on instrumented posterolateral spinal fusion and device-related stress shielding.

Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1997-2-15

[5]
Use of electromagnetic fields in a spinal fusion. A rabbit model.

Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1997-10-15

[6]
A prospective cohort analysis of adjacent vertebral body bone mineral density in lumbar surgery patients with or without instrumented posterolateral fusion: a 9- to 12-year follow-up.

Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2005-8-1

[7]
Outcomes after posterolateral lumbar fusion with instrumentation in patients treated with adjunctive pulsed electromagnetic field stimulation.

Adv Ther. 2001

[8]
In vivo evaluation of coralline hydroxyapatite and direct current electrical stimulation in lumbar spinal fusion.

Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1999-10-15

[9]
Effect of the type of electrical stimulation on spinal fusion in a rat posterolateral spinal fusion model.

Spine J. 2018-12-22

[10]
Single-level instrumented posterolateral fusion of lumbar spine with beta-tricalcium phosphate versus autograft: a prospective, randomized study with 3-year follow-up.

Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2008-5-20

引用本文的文献

[1]
Effect of electrical stimulation on the fusion rate after spinal surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Neurosurg Rev. 2024-9-16

[2]
Electroactive Spinal Instrumentation for Targeted Osteogenesis and Spine Fusion: A Computational Study.

Int J Spine Surg. 2023-2

[3]
Pulsed Electromagnetic Field Stimulators Efficacy for Noninvasive Bone Growth in Spine Surgery.

J Korean Neurosurg Soc. 2021-7

[4]
Translational Insights into Extremely Low Frequency Pulsed Electromagnetic Fields (ELF-PEMFs) for Bone Regeneration after Trauma and Orthopedic Surgery.

J Clin Med. 2019-11-20

[5]
Electrical stimulation-based bone fracture treatment, if it works so well why do not more surgeons use it?

Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg. 2020-4

[6]
Electrical stimulation to enhance spinal fusion: a systematic review.

Evid Based Spine Care J. 2014-10

[7]
Electrical stimulation in bone healing: critical analysis by evaluating levels of evidence.

Eplasty. 2011

[8]
Recovery Effects of a 180 mT Static Magnetic Field on Bone Mineral Density of Osteoporotic Lumbar Vertebrae in Ovariectomized Rats.

Evid Based Complement Alternat Med. 2010-9-28

[9]
Fusion mass bone quality after uninstrumented spinal fusion in older patients.

Eur Spine J. 2010-4-29

[10]
Outcome of invasive treatment modalities on back pain and sciatica: an evidence-based review.

Eur Spine J. 2006-1

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

推荐工具

医学文档翻译智能文献检索