This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Letters to the Editor: Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when Letters to the Editor are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow E-mail this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My File Cabinet
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowReprints and Permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Miller, G. J.
Right arrow Articles by Tylkowski, C. M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Miller, G. J.
Right arrow Articles by Tylkowski, C. M.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Technorati  
What's this?

The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, Vol 66, Issue 5 693-698, Copyright © 1984 by Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, Inc

JOURNAL CONTENTS

Electromagnetic stimulation of canine bone grafts

GJ Miller, H Burchardt, WF Enneking and CM Tylkowski

We evaluated the use of pulsed electromagnetic-field stimulation to affect the rate of healing or incorporation of segmental autogenous cortical bone grafts in the dog in vivo. This non-invasive method of electrical stimulation has been implicated in increasing bone osteogenesis or augmentation of the repair process in the canine fibular osteotomy. We utilized two-month and six-month stimulation protocols. At six months, all of the animals were evaluated biomechanically using rapid-loading torsional testing. Histological evaluation using tetracycline labeling was used to evaluate cumulative new-bone formation and porosity, while graft-host time to union was evaluated roentgenographically every two weeks. Recent reports have implied that particular pulse configurations might be effective in improving graft revascularization and incorporation. The results of our investigation indicated that there was no significant effect on the biomechanical strength, histological presentation, or time to union with either two months or six months of pulsed electromagnetic-field stimulation using the particular waveform described.
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?