Efficacy of electrical stimulation for spinal fusion: a meta-analysis of fusion rate

Bioelectricity in dental medicine: a narrative review

BACKGROUND

Bioelectric signals, whether exogenous or endogenous, play crucial roles in the life processes of organisms. Recently, the significance of bioelectricity in the field of dentistry is steadily gaining greater attention.

OBJECTIVE

This narrative review aims to comprehensively outline the theory, physiological effects, and practical applications of bioelectricity in dental medicine and to offer insights into its potential future direction. It attempts to provide dental clinicians and researchers with an electrophysiological perspective to enhance their clinical practice or fundamental research endeavors.

METHODS

An online computer search for relevant literature was performed in PubMed, Web of Science and Cochrane Library, with the keywords "bioelectricity, endogenous electric signal, electric stimulation, dental medicine."

RESULTS

Eventually, 288 documents were included for review. The variance in ion concentration between the interior and exterior of the cell membrane, referred to as transmembrane potential, forms the fundamental basis of bioelectricity. Transmembrane potential has been established as an essential regulator of intercellular communication, mechanotransduction, migration, proliferation, and immune responses. Thus, exogenous electric stimulation can significantly alter cellular action by affecting transmembrane potential. In the field of dental medicine, electric stimulation has proven useful for assessing pulp condition, locating root apices, improving the properties of dental biomaterials, expediting orthodontic tooth movement, facilitating implant osteointegration, addressing maxillofacial malignancies, and managing neuromuscular dysfunction. Furthermore, the reprogramming of bioelectric signals holds promise as a means to guide organism development and intervene in disease processes. Besides, the development of high-throughput electrophysiological tools will be imperative for identifying ion channel targets and precisely modulating bioelectricity in the future.

CONCLUSIONS

Bioelectricity has found application in various concepts of dental medicine but large-scale, standardized, randomized controlled clinical trials are still necessary in the future. In addition, the precise, repeatable and predictable measurement and modulation methods of bioelectric signal patterns are essential research direction.

Role of biophysical stimulation in multimodal management of vertebral compression fractures

Raised life expectancy and aging of the general population are associated with an increased concern for fragility fractures due to factors such as osteoporosis, reduced bone density, and an higher risk of falls. Among these, the most frequent are vertebral compression fractures (VCF), which can be clinically occult. Once the diagnosis is made, generally thorough antero-posterior and lateral views of the affected spine at the radiographs, a comprehensive workup to assess the presence of a metabolic bone disease or secondary causes of osteoporosis and bone frailty is required. Treatment uses a multimodal management consisting of a combination of brace, pain management, bone metabolism evaluation, osteoporosis medication and has recently incorporated biophysical stimulation, a noninvasive technique that uses induced electric stimulation to improve bone recovery through the direct and indirect upregulation of bone morphogenic proteins, stimulating bone formation and remodeling. It contributes to the effectiveness of the therapy, promoting accelerated healing, supporting the reduction of bed rest and pain medications, improving patients' quality of life, and reducing the risk to undergo surgery in patients affected by VCFs. Therefore, the aim of this review is to outline the fundamental concepts of multimodal treatment for VCF, as well as the present function and significance of biophysical stimulation in the treatment of VCF patients.

Noninvasive electrical stimulation as an adjunct to fusion procedures: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

Noninvasive electrical stimulation represents a distinct group of devices used to augment fusion rates. However, data regarding outcomes of noninvasive electrical stimulation have come from a small number of studies. The goal of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to determine outcomes of noninvasive electrical stimulation used as an adjunct to fusion procedures to improve rates of successful fusion.

METHODS

PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Clinical Trials database were searched according to search strategy and PRISMA guidelines. Random-effects meta-analyses of fusion rates with the three main modalities of noninvasive electrical stimulation, capacitively coupled stimulation (CCS), pulsed electromagnetic fields (PEMFs), and combined magnetic fields (CMFs), were conducted using R version 4.1.0 (The R Foundation for Statistical Computing). Both retrospective studies and clinical trials were included. Animal studies were excluded. Risk-of-bias analysis was performed with the Risk of Bias 2 (RoB 2) and Risk of Bias in Nonrandomized Studies of Interventions (ROBINS-I) tools.

RESULTS

Searches of PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Clinical Trials database identified 8 articles with 1216 participants meeting criteria from 213 initial results. There was a high overall risk of bias identified for the majority of randomized studies. No meta-analysis could be performed for CCS as only 1 study was identified. Meta-analysis of 6 studies of fusion rates in PEMF did not find any difference between treatment and control groups (OR 1.89, 95% CI 0.36-9.80, p = 0.449). Meta-analysis of 2 studies of CMF found no difference in fusion rates between control and treatment groups (OR 0.90, 95% CI 0.07-11.93, p = 0.939). Subgroup analysis of PEMF was limited given the small number of studies and patients, although significantly increased fusion rates were seen in some subgroups.

CONCLUSIONS

This meta-analysis of clinical outcomes and fusion rates in noninvasive electrical stimulation compared to no stimulation did not identify any increases in fusion rates for any modality. A high degree of heterogeneity between studies was noted. Although subgroup analysis identified significant differences in fusion rates in certain groups, these findings were based on a small number of studies and further research is needed. This analysis does not support routine use of these devices to augment fusion rates, although the data are limited by a high risk of bias and a small number of available studies.

Pulsed Electromagnetic Field Stimulators Efficacy for Noninvasive Bone Growth in Spine Surgery

The growth of pulsed electromagnetic field (PEMF) therapy and its progress over the years for use in post-operative bone growth has been revolutionary in its effect on bone tissue proliferation and vascular flow. However, further progress in PEMF therapy has been difficult due to lack of more evidence-based understanding of its mechanism of action. Our objective was to review the current understanding of bone growth physiology, the mechanism of PEMF therapy action along with its application in spinal surgery and associated outcomes. The authors of this review examined multiple controlled, comparative, and cohort studies to compare fusion rates of patients undergoing PEMF stimulation. Examining spinal fusion rates, a rounded comparison of post-fusion outcomes with and without bone stimulator was performed. Results showed that postoperative spinal surgery PEMF stimulation had higher rates of fusion than control groups. Though PEMF therapy was proven more effective, multiple factors contributed to difficulty in patient compliance for use. Extended timeframe of treatment and cost of treatment were the main obstacles to full compliance. This review showed that PEMF therapy presented an increased rate of recovery in patients, supporting the use of these devices as an effective post-surgical aid. Given the recent advances in the development of PEMF devices, affordability and access will be much easier suited to the patient population, allowing for more readily available treatment options.

Evaluating the Effectiveness of Biophysical Methods of Osteogenesis Stimulation: Review

Background. Stimulation of osteogenesis (SO) by biophysical methods has been widely used in practice to accelerate healing or stimulate the healing of fractures with non-unions, since the middle of the XIX century. SO can be carried out by direct current electrostimulation, or indirectly by low-intensity pulsed ultrasound, capacitive electrical coupling stimulation, and pulsed electromagnetic field stimulation. SO simulates natural physiological processes: in the case of electrical stimulation, it changes the electromagnetic potential of damaged cell tissues in a manner similar to normal healing processes, or in the case of low-intensity pulsed ultrasound, it produces weak mechanical effects on the fracture area. SO increases the expression of factors and signaling pathways responsible for tissue regeneration and bone mineralization and ultimately accelerates bone union.The purpose of this review was to present the most up-to-date data from laboratory and clinical studies of the effectiveness of SO.Material and Methods. The results of laboratory studies and the final results of metaanalyses for each of the four SO methods published from 1959 to 2020 in the PubMed, EMBASE, and eLibrary databases are reviewed.Conclusion. The use of SO effectively stimulates the healing of fractures with the correct location of the sensors, compliance with the intensity and time of exposure, as well as the timing of use for certain types of fractures. In case of non-union or delayed union of fractures, spondylodesis, arthrodesis, preference should be given to non-invasive methods of SO. Invasive direct current stimulation can be useful for non-union of long bones, spondylodesis with the risk of developing pseudoarthrosis.

Evaluating the Effectiveness of Biophysical Methods of Osteogenesis Stimulation: Review

Background. Stimulation of osteogenesis (SO) by biophysical methods has been widely used in practice to accelerate healing or stimulate the healing of fractures with non-unions, since the middle of the XIX century. SO can be carried out by direct current electrostimulation, or indirectly by low-intensity pulsed ultrasound, capacitive electrical coupling stimulation, and pulsed electromagnetic field stimulation. SO simulates natural physiological processes: in the case of electrical stimulation, it changes the electromagnetic potential of damaged cell tissues in a manner similar to normal healing processes, or in the case of low-intensity pulsed ultrasound, it produces weak mechanical effects on the fracture area. SO increases the expression of factors and signaling pathways responsible for tissue regeneration and bone mineralization and ultimately accelerates bone union.The purpose of this review was to present the most up-to-date data from laboratory and clinical studies of the effectiveness of SO.Material and Methods. The results of laboratory studies and the final results of metaanalyses for each of the four SO methods published from 1959 to 2020 in the PubMed, EMBASE, and eLibrary databases are reviewed.Conclusion. The use of SO effectively stimulates the healing of fractures with the correct location of the sensors, compliance with the intensity and time of exposure, as well as the timing of use for certain types of fractures. In case of non-union or delayed union of fractures, spondylodesis, arthrodesis, preference should be given to non-invasive methods of SO. Invasive direct current stimulation can be useful for non-union of long bones, spondylodesis with the risk of developing pseudoarthrosis.

Efficacy of Electrical Stimulation for Spinal Fusion: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Spinal fusion is one of the most common procedures performed in spine surgery. As rates of spinal fusion continue to increase, rates of complications such as nonunions continue to increase as well. Current evidence supporting the use of electrical stimulation to promote fusion is inconclusive. This review aimed to determine if postoperative electrical stimulation is more efficacious than no stimulation or placebo in promoting radiographic fusion in patients undergoing spinal fusion. We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), EMBASE, CINAHL and MEDLINE from date of inception to current. Ongoing clinical trials were also identified and reference lists of included studies were manually searched for relevant articles. Two reviewers independently screened studies, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias. Data were pooled using the Mantel-Haenszel method. Trialists were contacted for any missing or incomplete data. Of 1184 articles screened, 7 studies were eligible for final inclusion (n = 941). A total of 487 patients received postoperative electrical stimulation and 454 patients received control or sham stimulation. All evidence was of moderate quality. Electrical stimulation (pulsed electromagnetic fields, direct current, and capacitive coupling) increased the odds of a successful fusion by 2.5-fold relative to control (OR = 2.53, 95% CI 1.86 to 3.43, p < 0.00001). A test for subgroup interaction by stimulation type, smoking status, and number of levels fused was not significant (p = 0.93, p = 0.82 and p = 0.65, respectively). This systematic review and meta-analysis found moderate-quality evidence supporting the use of postoperative electrical stimulation as an adjunct to spinal fusion surgery. Patients treated with electrical stimulation have significantly greater rates of successful fusion. The level of evidence for this study is therapeutic level I.

Electrical Stimulation and Bone Healing: A Review of Current Technology and Clinical Applications

Pseudarthrosis is an exceedingly common, costly, and morbid complication in the treatment of long bone fractures and after spinal fusion surgery. Electrical bone growth stimulation (EBGS) presents a unique approach to accelerate healing and promote fusion success rates. Over the past three decades, increased experience and widespread use of EBGS devices has led to significant improvements in stimulation paradigms and clinical outcomes. In this paper, we comprehensively review the literature and examine the history, scientific evidence, available technology, and clinical applications for EBGS. We summarize indications, limitations, and provide an overview of cost-effectiveness and future directions of EBGS technology. Various models of electrical stimulation have been proposed and marketed as adjuncts for spinal fusions and long bone fractures. Clinical studies show variable safety and efficacy of EBGS under different conditions and clinical scenarios. While the results of clinical trials do not support indiscriminate EBGS utilization for any bone injury, the evidence does suggest that EBGS is desirable and cost efficient for certain orthopedic indications, especially when used in combination with standard, first-line treatments. This review should serve as a reference to inform practicing clinicians of available treatment options, facilitate evidence-based decision making, and provide a platform for further research.

Efficacy of Electrical Stimulators for Bone Healing: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Sham-Controlled Trials

Electrical stimulation is a common adjunct used to promote bone healing; its efficacy, however, remains uncertain. We conducted a meta-analysis of randomized sham-controlled trials to establish the efficacy of electrical stimulation for bone healing. We identified all trials randomizing patients to electrical or sham stimulation for bone healing. Outcomes were pain relief, functional improvement, and radiographic nonunion. Two reviewers assessed eligibility and risk of bias, performed data extraction, and rated the quality of the evidence. Fifteen trials met our inclusion criteria. Moderate quality evidence from 4 trials found that stimulation produced a significant improvement in pain (mean difference (MD) on 100-millimeter visual analogue scale = -7.7 mm; 95% CI -13.92 to -1.43; p = 0.02). Two trials found no difference in functional outcome (MD = -0.88; 95% CI -6.63 to 4.87; p = 0.76). Moderate quality evidence from 15 trials found that stimulation reduced radiographic nonunion rates by 35% (95% CI 19% to 47%; number needed to treat = 7; p < 0.01). Patients treated with electrical stimulation as an adjunct for bone healing have less pain and are at reduced risk for radiographic nonunion; functional outcome data are limited and requires increased focus in future trials.

Electrical Stimulation in the Bone Repair of Defects Created in Rabbit Skulls

Electrical stimulation has been used in different conditions for tissue regeneration. The aim of this study was to analyze the tissue response of defects created in rabbit skulls to electrical stimulation. Two groups were formed, each with 9 New Zealand rabbits; two 5 mm defects were made, one in each parietal, with one being randomly filled with autogenous bone extracted as particles and the other maintained only with blood clotting. The rabbits were euthanized at 8 weeks and 15 weeks to then study the samples collected histologically. In the 8-week analysis bone formation was observed in the defects in the test and control filled with bone graft, whereas the defects with clotting presented a very early stage of bone formation with abundant connective tissue. At 15 weeks an advanced stage of bone regeneration was identified in the defects with bone graft, whereas no significant differences were found in the electrically stimulated defects. In conclusion, electrical stimulus does not alter the sequence of bone formation; new studies could help establish patterns and influences of the stimulus on bone regeneration.

Dorsal root ganglion electrical stimulation promoted intertransverse process spinal fusion without decortications and bone grafting: a proof-of-concept study

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

Periosteum, endosteum, and bone are innervated by sensory nerves expressing calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP), which is a known osteoanabolic peptide and plays an important role in fracture healing and spinal fusion. Synthesis and release of CGRP are found in sensory neurons located in the dorsal root ganglions (DRGs) and can be upregulated by electrical stimulation (ES) at DRG.

PURPOSE

To prove our study hypothesis on the potential of precise ES at DRG through implantable microelectrical stimulation system (IMESS) for its effect on promoting spinal fusion in a rat model without decortications and bone grafting.

STUDY DESIGN

An experimental animal study.

METHODS

A novel IMESS was developed for stimulating L4-L6 DRG in rats. Sixteen rats were used and divided equally into the control group without ES and the ES group, with a daily 20 minutes ES to DRG for 6 weeks. At the end of 6 weeks, radiography and microcomputed tomography were conducted to evaluate new bone formation and spinal fusion. Bilateral L4-L6 DRGs were harvested for immunohistochemistry and quantification of neurons with upregulated CGRP expression.

RESULTS

In the ES group, rate of radiographic fusion with complete and uninterrupted bony bridging was 100% (8/8) at the right L4/L5 transverse processes and 75% (6/8) at the right L5/L6 transverse processes. Bony callus formation was absent at the left L4-L6 transverse processes in the ES group and in bilateral L4-L6 transverse processes in the control group.

CONCLUSIONS

We proved for the first time that precise ES at DRG through IMESS effectively promoted intertransverse process fusion in rat model without decortications and bone grafting. Electrical stimulation at DRG might be an attractive minimal invasive bioengineering approach and an alternative therapy for intertransverse process fusion that is increasingly being used for the treatment of degenerative spine disorders.