Electromagnetic fields do not affect bone micro-architecture in osteoporotic rats.

Bone & joint research · 2014 · No effect · Low evidence

← Research stream

No effectLow evidencePaper 4681

In both ovariectomized and sham-ovariectomized rats, EMF treatment (20 Gauss) did not produce cancellous or cortical bone changes over follow-up. EMF also did not affect mineralised callus volume around the fibular osteotomy.

Study snapshot

PublicationBone & joint research · 2014

Study typeanimal

Reported directionNo effect

Evidence ratingLow

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: Electromagnetic fields (EMF) are widely used in musculoskeletal disorders. There are indications that EMF might also be effective in the treatment of osteoporosis. To justify clinical follow-up experiments, we examined the effects of EMF on bone micro-architectural changes in osteoporotic and healthy rats. Moreover, we tested the effects of EMF on fracture healing. METHODS: EMF (20 Gauss) was examined in rats (aged 20 weeks), which underwent an ovariectomy (OVX; n = 8) or sham-ovariectomy (sham-OVX; n = 8). As a putative positive control, all rats received bilateral fibular osteotomies to examine the effects on fracture healing. Treatment was applied to one proximal lower leg (three hours a day, five days a week); the lower leg was not treated and served as a control. Bone architectural changes of the proximal tibia and bone formation around the osteotomy were evaluated using in vivo microCT scans at start of treatment and after three and six weeks. RESULTS: In both OVX and sham-OVX groups, EMF did not result in cancellous or cortical bone changes during follow-up. Moreover, EMF did not affect the amount of mineralised callus volume around the fibular osteotomy. CONCLUSIONS: In this study we were unable to reproduce the strong beneficial findings reported by others. This might indicate that EMF treatment is very sensitive to the specific set-up, which would be a serious hindrance for clinical use. No evidence was found that EMF treatment can influence bone mass for the benefit of osteoporotic patients. Cite this article: Bone Joint Res 2014;3:230-5.

Machine Enhanced Logic

AI evidence extraction

Structured fields below were generated from the paper’s abstract and metadata to make the evidence easier to inspect. Automated extraction may be incomplete or incorrect; verify important details against the original paper.

Study typeanimal

Effect directionno_effect

PopulationRats (20 weeks old); ovariectomized (osteoporotic model) and sham-ovariectomized

Sample size16

Exposure3 hours/day, 5 days/week; follow-up at 3 and 6 weeks

Evidence strengthLowConfidence: 78% · Peer reviewed: yes

Main findings

Outcomes measured

Cancellous bone micro-architectural changes (proximal tibia)
Cortical bone micro-architectural changes (proximal tibia)
Mineralised callus volume around fibular osteotomy (fracture healing)

Limitations

Frequency/band of EMF not reported in abstract
Small group sizes (n=8 per group)
Authors note results may be sensitive to the specific experimental set-up

View raw extracted JSON

{
  "study_type": "animal",
  "exposure": {
    "band": null,
    "source": null,
    "frequency_mhz": null,
    "sar_wkg": null,
    "duration": "3 hours/day, 5 days/week; follow-up at 3 and 6 weeks"
  },
  "population": "Rats (20 weeks old); ovariectomized (osteoporotic model) and sham-ovariectomized",
  "sample_size": 16,
  "outcomes": [
    "Cancellous bone micro-architectural changes (proximal tibia)",
    "Cortical bone micro-architectural changes (proximal tibia)",
    "Mineralised callus volume around fibular osteotomy (fracture healing)"
  ],
  "main_findings": "In both ovariectomized and sham-ovariectomized rats, EMF treatment (20 Gauss) did not produce cancellous or cortical bone changes over follow-up. EMF also did not affect mineralised callus volume around the fibular osteotomy.",
  "effect_direction": "no_effect",
  "limitations": [
    "Frequency/band of EMF not reported in abstract",
    "Small group sizes (n=8 per group)",
    "Authors note results may be sensitive to the specific experimental set-up"
  ],
  "evidence_strength": "low",
  "confidence": 0.78,
  "peer_reviewed_likely": "yes",
  "keywords": [
    "electromagnetic fields",
    "EMF",
    "osteoporosis",
    "ovariectomy",
    "rat model",
    "bone micro-architecture",
    "microCT",
    "fracture healing",
    "callus volume",
    "fibular osteotomy"
  ],
  "suggested_hubs": []
}

AI can be wrong. Always verify against the paper.

AI-extracted fields are generated from the abstract and metadata and may be incomplete or incorrect. This material is for informational purposes and is not medical advice.

Identifiers and source

DOI: 10.1302/2046-3758.37.2000221
PubMed: 25015993

Read the original paper →

Related papers

← Back to the Research Library