Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Comparative study of the use of electromagnetic fields in patients with pseudoarthrosis of tibia treated by intramedullary nailing

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
International Orthopaedics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

We made a comparative cohort study in patients suffering from tibial pseudoarthrosis, all of whom were treated by intramedullary nailing. We divided patients into two groups: one treated by intramedullary nailing only (control group) and the other by intramedullary nailing combined with pulsed electromagnetic fields (PEMFs). The study included 57 cases of tibial pseudoarthrosis in 57 patients from February 1987 to February 2002. Pseudoarthrosis was treated surgically in all cases (Grosse-Kempf dynamic intramedullary nailing). This was combined with PEMFs in 22 cases. The average age was 38.3 years (range 14–89 years) and the average duration of follow-up was 27.2 months (range 12–48 months). Forty-nine fractures (86%) healed and eight (14%) did not. Of the group treated with PEMFs, 20 (91%) healed and two (9%) did not; from the group that did not receive PEMF (35), 29 (83%) healed compared to six (17%) that did not. The relationship between union and use of PEMFs, and between time to union and use of PEMFs was clinically relevant. PEMFs are useful when treating tibial pseudoarthrosis. Its noninvasive nature means that there are more complication-free unions.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Aaron RK, Ciombor DMcK, Simon BJ (2004) Treatment of nonunions with electric and electromagnetic fields. Clin Orthop 419:21–29

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Aaron RK, Ciombor DMcK, Simon BJ (2004) Stimulation of growth factor synthesis by electric and electromagnetic fields. Clin Orthop 419:30–37

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Adair RK (1991) Biological effects on the cellular level of electric field pulses. Health Phys 61:395–399

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Anderson JC, Erikson C (1970) Piezoelectric properties of dry and wet bone. Nature 227:491–492

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Bassett CAL, Valdés MG, Hernandez E (1982) Modification of fracture repair with selected pulsing electromagnetic fields. J Bone Jt Surg 64-A:888

    Google Scholar 

  6. Bassett CAL, Mitchell SN, Gaston SR (1981) Treatment of ununited tibial diaphyseal fractures with pulsing electromagnetic fields. J Bone Jt Surg 63-A:511–523

    Google Scholar 

  7. Brighton C, Shaman P, Heppenstall B (1995) Tibial nonunion treated with direct current; capacitive coupling or bone graft. Clin Orthop 321:223–234

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Brighton CT, Pollack SR (1984) Treatment of nonunion of the tibia with a capacitively coupled electrical field. J Trauma 24:153–155

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Brighton CT (1981) Treatment of nonunion of the tibia with constant direct current: J Trauma 21(3):189–195

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Brighton CT, Pollack SR (1985) Treatment of recalcitrant nonunion of the tibia with capacitively coupled electric field. J Bone Jt Sur 67-A:577–585

    Google Scholar 

  11. Cooper MS (1995) Membrane potential perturbations induced in tissue cells by pulsed electric fields. Bioelectromagnetic 1995(16):255–262

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Friendemberg ZB, Brighton CT (1996) Bioelectric potentials in bone. J Bone Jt Surg 48-A:915–923

    Google Scholar 

  13. Fukada E, Yatsuda J (1957) On the piezoelectric effect of bone. J Physio Soc Japan 12:1158–1162

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Heckman JD et al (1981) Nonunion treatment with pulsed electromagnetic fields. Clin Orthop 161:58–66

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Heppenstall RB et al (1984) Prognostic factors in nonunion of the tibia: an evaluation of 185 cases treated with constant direct current. J Trauma 24(9):790–795

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Lavine LS, Grodzinsky AJ (1987) Electrical Stimulation of repairs of bone. J Bone Jt Surg 69-A:626

    Google Scholar 

  17. López-Durán L, Yageya J (1980) Bioelectric potentials after fracture of the tibia. Acta Orthop Scand 51:601–605

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Scott G, King JB (1994) A prospective, double-blind trial of electrical capacitive coupling in the treatment of non-union of long bone. J Bone Joint Surg 76A:820–825

    Google Scholar 

  19. Sharrard WJW (1990) A doubled-blind trial of pulsed electromagnetic fields for delayed union of tibial fractures. J Bone Joint Surg B 72:347–355

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Simonis RB, Parnell EJ, Ray PS, Peacock JL (2003) Electrical treatment of tibial non-union: a prospective, randomised, double-blind trial. Injury 34(5):357–362

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Skerry TM, Pead MJ, Lanyon LE (1991) Modulation of bone loss during disuse by pulsed electromagnetic fields. J Orthop Res 9:600–608

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Sledge S, Johnson KD, Henry MB, Watson JT (1989) Intramedullary nailing with reaming to treat non-union of the tibia. J Bone Joint Surg 71A:1004–1019

    Google Scholar 

  23. Templeman D, Thomas M, Varecka T, Kyle R (1995) Exchange reamed intramedullary nailing for delayed union and non-union of the tibia. Clin Orthop 315:169–175

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Wang Z, Clark C, Brighton C (2006) Up-regulation of bone morphogenetic proteins in cultured murine bone cells with use of specific electric fields. J Bone Joint Surg 88-A:1053–1065

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Hospital Clínico San Carlos, Madrid, Spain

    Juan L. Cebrián, Pilar Gallego, Alberto Francés, Piedad Sánchez, Elena Manrique, Fernando Marco & Luis López-Durán

  2. Servicio de Traumatología, Hospital Clínico San Carlos, Martin Lagos s/n, 28040, Madrid, Spain

    Juan L. Cebrián

Authors
  1. Juan L. Cebrián
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Pilar Gallego
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Alberto Francés
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Piedad Sánchez
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Elena Manrique
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Fernando Marco
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Luis López-Durán
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Juan L. Cebrián.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Cebrián, J.L., Gallego, P., Francés, A. et al. Comparative study of the use of electromagnetic fields in patients with pseudoarthrosis of tibia treated by intramedullary nailing. International Orthopaedics (SICOT) 34, 437–440 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-009-0806-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-009-0806-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation