RF Safe

Promising applications of electromagnetic field therapy in dental implantology: A systematic review.

Journal of advanced periodontology & implant dentistry · 2024 · Mixed · Low evidence

← Research stream
MixedLow evidencePaper 5846

Twelve preclinical and clinical studies were included. Most studies reported beneficial effects of non-ionizing EMF therapy on implant stability and on measures related to osteogenesis/osseointegration (e.g., accelerated bone repair and increased peri-implant…

Study snapshot

PublicationJournal of advanced periodontology & implant dentistry · 2024
Study typesystematic_review
Reported directionMixed
Evidence ratingLow

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Non-ionizing electromagnetic field (EMF) exposure therapies are non-invasive and safe treatment options that can potentially change available treatments. In this review, we examined the applications of such therapies in dental implant surgery by conducting a systematic review. METHODS: A comprehensive search of several international electronic databases was conducted from inception to December 14, 2022. This review included interventional studies that evaluated the advantages of adjunctive magnetic or combined EMFs on dental implants compared to conventional treatments. RESULTS: From a total of 1695 studies, 12 preclinical and clinical studies were selected, discussing EMF-based treatments for enhancing implant stability, osteogenesis, and osseointegration, as well as alleviating post-implant surgery manifestations. Almost all studies on maxillary and mandibular implant stability showed beneficial effects of non-ionizing EMF in humans. Most studies evaluating osteogenesis and osseointegration indicated that EMF exposure could accelerate bone repair and peri-implant bone formation and increase bone contact ratios, bone volume fraction (bone volume/total volume), trabecular number, and trabecular thickness. Only two clinical studies examined the effect of EMF on pain and swelling after dental implant surgery, with one finding that subjects exposed to EMF used analgesics fewer times and in far lower doses than the control group and the other finding no significant difference in reducing these outcomes between the groups. CONCLUSION: Overall, devices that deliver non-ionizing low-level EMF can be a viable and widely recognized non-invasive adjuvant therapy for attaining success and better outcomes after dental implant surgery due to their efficacy, safety, and short exposure time.

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 typesystematic_review
Effect directionmixed
PopulationHumans and preclinical models in studies of dental implants (maxillary/mandibular implant surgery)
Sample size12
Exposureshort exposure time (not quantified)
Evidence strengthLowConfidence: 74% · Peer reviewed: yes

Main findings

Twelve preclinical and clinical studies were included. Most studies reported beneficial effects of non-ionizing EMF therapy on implant stability and on measures related to osteogenesis/osseointegration (e.g., accelerated bone repair and increased peri-implant bone formation and bone microarchitecture metrics). Evidence for reducing post-surgery pain/swelling was mixed across two clinical studies (one reported reduced analgesic use; one reported no significant difference).

Outcomes measured

  • implant stability
  • osteogenesis
  • osseointegration
  • bone repair
  • peri-implant bone formation
  • bone contact ratios
  • bone volume fraction (bone volume/total volume)
  • trabecular number
  • trabecular thickness
  • post-implant surgery pain
  • post-implant surgery swelling
  • analgesic use

Limitations

  • Frequency, SAR, and detailed exposure parameters were not reported in the abstract.
  • The abstract does not report sample sizes of individual included studies or pooled quantitative estimates.
  • Only two clinical studies assessed pain and swelling outcomes, with inconsistent findings.
View raw extracted JSON
{
  "study_type": "systematic_review",
  "exposure": {
    "band": null,
    "source": "therapeutic EMF device (adjunctive magnetic or combined EMFs)",
    "frequency_mhz": null,
    "sar_wkg": null,
    "duration": "short exposure time (not quantified)"
  },
  "population": "Humans and preclinical models in studies of dental implants (maxillary/mandibular implant surgery)",
  "sample_size": 12,
  "outcomes": [
    "implant stability",
    "osteogenesis",
    "osseointegration",
    "bone repair",
    "peri-implant bone formation",
    "bone contact ratios",
    "bone volume fraction (bone volume/total volume)",
    "trabecular number",
    "trabecular thickness",
    "post-implant surgery pain",
    "post-implant surgery swelling",
    "analgesic use"
  ],
  "main_findings": "Twelve preclinical and clinical studies were included. Most studies reported beneficial effects of non-ionizing EMF therapy on implant stability and on measures related to osteogenesis/osseointegration (e.g., accelerated bone repair and increased peri-implant bone formation and bone microarchitecture metrics). Evidence for reducing post-surgery pain/swelling was mixed across two clinical studies (one reported reduced analgesic use; one reported no significant difference).",
  "effect_direction": "mixed",
  "limitations": [
    "Frequency, SAR, and detailed exposure parameters were not reported in the abstract.",
    "The abstract does not report sample sizes of individual included studies or pooled quantitative estimates.",
    "Only two clinical studies assessed pain and swelling outcomes, with inconsistent findings."
  ],
  "evidence_strength": "low",
  "confidence": 0.74,
  "peer_reviewed_likely": "yes",
  "keywords": [
    "electromagnetic field therapy",
    "non-ionizing EMF",
    "magnetic fields",
    "dental implants",
    "implant stability",
    "osteogenesis",
    "osseointegration",
    "bone repair",
    "pain",
    "swelling",
    "systematic review"
  ],
  "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: 10.34172/japid.2024.001
PubMed: 39027204

Read the original paper →

Related papers

← Back to the Research Library