Effects of electrical stimulation on periodontal tissue remodeling in rats

Current insights in the preclinical study of palatal wound healing and oronasal fistula after cleft palate repair

Poor palatal wound healing after cleft palate repair could lead to unfavorable prognosis such as oronasal fistula (ONF), which might affect the patient's velopharyngeal function as well as their quality of life. Thus, restoring poor palatal wound healing for avoiding the occurrence of ONF should be considered the key to postoperative care after cleft palate repair. This review provided current insights in the preclinical study of poor palatal wound healing after cleft palate repair. This review comprehensively introduced the animal model establishment for palatal wound healing and related ONF, including the models by mice, rats, piglets, and dogs, and then demonstrated the aspects for investigating poor palatal wound healing and related treatments, including possible signaling pathways that could be involved in the formation of poor palatal wound healing, the related microbiota changes because of the deformity of palatal structure, and the studies for potential therapeutic strategies for palatal wound healing and ONF. The purpose of this review was to show the state of the art in preclinical studies about palatal wound healing after cleft palate repair and to show the promising aspects for better management of palatal wound healing.

Endogenous Mechanisms of Craniomaxillofacial Repair: Toward Novel Regenerative Therapies

In the fields of oral and craniomaxillofacial surgery, regeneration of multiple tissue types-including bone, skin, teeth, and mucosal soft tissue-is often a desired outcome. However, limited endogenous capacity for regeneration, as well as predisposition of many tissues to fibrotic healing, may prevent recovery of normal form and function for patients. Recent basic science research has advanced our understanding of molecular and cellular pathways of repair in the oral/craniofacial region and how these are influenced by local microenvironment and embryonic origin. Here, we review the current state of knowledge in oral and craniomaxillofacial tissue repair/regeneration in four key areas: bone (in the context of calvarial defects and mandibular regeneration during distraction osteogenesis); skin (in the context of cleft lip/palate surgery); oral mucosa (in the context of minimally scarring repair of mucosal injuries); and teeth (in the context of dental disease/decay). These represent four distinct healing processes and outcomes. We will discuss both divergent and conserved pathways of repair in these contexts, with an eye toward fundamental mechanisms of regeneration vs. fibrosis as well as translational research directions. Ultimately, this knowledge can be leveraged to develop new cell-based and molecular treatment strategies to encourage bone and soft tissue regeneration in oral and craniomaxillofacial surgery.

Electrical stimulation enhances early palatal wound healing in mice

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE

Electrical stimulation (ES) has been used to treat chronic wound and other clinical applications, showing favorable results in wound closure. It was hypothesized that ES can present a positive effect on oral mucosa healing. The aim of this study was to investigate the effects of ES during the palatal mucosa early healing process in Swiss mice.

METHODS

Ninety animals were divided into two groups: Control (C; n = 45), which received Sham ES applications, and Test (ES; n = 45), which received ES (100 μA; 9 kHz; 660 mVpp) once a day for 3 days. A full thickness wound was performed with a 1.5 mm diameter biopsy punch in the hard palate. Histologically, the following parameters were evaluated: palatal wound closure and epithelial and connective wound edge distance (EED and CED). Furthermore, IL-1β, IL-6, IL-10 TNF-α, and VEGF cytokine levels were evaluated by multiplex assay. The percentage of collagen fibers was assessed using the polarization method and the Smad proteins using the immunofluorescence method.

RESULTS

Palatal wound closure presented a significant reduction on day 5 in the ES group (p = 0.01). Additionally, both EED and CED were shorter for all time points in the ES group (p < 0.05), and the inflammatory markers IL-6, IL-10, TNF-α, and VEGF were reduced (p < 0.05). There were no differences in collagen fibers and phospho-Smad2 between the groups.

CONCLUSION

ES had a positive effect on early palatal wound closure outcomes, as well as on inflammatory markers.

Microcurrent electrotherapy improves palatal wound healing: Randomized clinical trial

BACKGROUND

This study was conducted to assess the clinical, immunological, and patient-centered outcomes of microcurrent electrotherapy on palatal wound healing.

METHODS

This was a parallel, double-masked randomized clinical trial, in which 53 patients with ridge preservation indications were selected and randomly assigned to one of two groups. In the control (sham) group (n = 27), palatal wounds, after free gingival grafts (FGG) harvest, received sham application of electrotherapy. In the test (electrotherapy treatment [EE]) group (n = 26), palatal wounds, after FGG harvest, received application of microcurrent electrotherapy protocol. Clinical parameters, patient-centered outcomes, and inflammatory markers were evaluated, up to 90 days postoperatively.

RESULTS

The EE group achieved earlier wound closure (P <0.001) and epithelialization (P <0.05; P = 0.03) at 7 and 14 days after harvest when compared with the sham group. Painful symptomatology was reported less frequently in the EE group than in the sham group at 3-day follow-up (P = 0.008). Likewise, an improvement in Oral Health Impact Profile was reported 2 days after the procedure by the EE group (P = 0.04). In addition, favorable modulation of inflammatory wound healing markers occurred when electrotherapy was applied.

CONCLUSION

Within the limits of the present study, it can be concluded that the use of a low-intensity electrotherapy protocol may accelerate palatal wound healing and decrease patient discomfort after FGG harvest.

Electrical stimulation-based bone fracture treatment, if it works so well why do not more surgeons use it?

BACKGROUND

Electrical stimulation (EStim) has been proven to promote bone healing in experimental settings and has been used clinically for many years and yet it has not become a mainstream clinical treatment.

METHODS

To better understand this discrepancy we reviewed 72 animal and 69 clinical studies published between 1978 and 2017, and separately asked 161 orthopedic surgeons worldwide about their awareness, experience, and acceptance of EStim for treating fracture patients.

RESULTS

Of the 72 animal studies, 77% reported positive outcomes, and the most common model, bone, fracture type, and method of administering EStim were dog, tibia, large bone defects, and DC, respectively. Of the 69 clinical studies, 73% reported positive outcomes, and the most common bone treated, fracture type, and method of administration were tibia, delayed/non-unions, and PEMF, respectively. Of the 161 survey respondents, most (73%) were aware of the positive outcomes reported in the literature, yet only 32% used EStim in their patients. The most common fracture they treated was delayed/non-unions, and the greatest problems with EStim were high costs and inconsistent results.

CONCLUSION

Despite their awareness of EStim's pro-fracture healing effects few orthopedic surgeons use it in their patients. Our review of the literature and survey indicate that this is due to confusion in the literature due to the great variation in methods reported, and the inconsistent results associated with this treatment approach. In spite of this surgeons seem to be open to using this treatment if advancements in the technology were able to provide an easy to use, cost-effective method to deliver EStim in their fracture patients.