Optimum microcurrent stimulation intensity for galvanotaxis in human fibroblasts

Wound Healing with Electrical Stimulation Technologies: A Review

Electrical stimulation (ES) is an attractive field among clinicians in the topic of wound healing, which is common yet complicated and requires multidisciplinary approaches. The conventional dressing and skin graft showed no promise on complete wound closure. These urge the need for the exploration of electrical stimulation to supplement current wound care management. This review aims to provide an overview of electrical stimulation in wound healing. The mechanism of galvanotaxis related to wound repair will be reviewed at the cellular and molecular levels. Meanwhile, different modalities of externally applied electricity mimicking a physiologic electric field will be discussed and compared in vitro, in vivo, and clinically. With the emerging of tissue engineering and regenerative medicine, the integration of electroconductive biomaterials into modern miniaturised dressing is of interest and has become possible with the advancing understanding of smart biomaterials.

Influence of microcurrent on the modulation of remodelling genes in a wound healing assay

The literature has shown the beneficial effects of microcurrent (MC) therapy on tissue repair. We investigated if the application of MC at 10 μA/90 s could modulate the expression of remodeling genes transforming growth factor beta (Tgfb), connective tissue growth factor (Ctgf), insulin-like growth factor 1 (Igf1), tenascin C (Tnc), Fibronectin (Fn1), Scleraxis (Scx), Fibromodulin (Fmod) and tenomodulin in NIH/3T3 fibroblasts in a wound healing assay. The cell migration was analyzed between days 0 and 4 in both fibroblasts (F) and fibroblasts + MC (F+MC) groups. On the 4th day, cell viability and gene expression were also analyzed after daily MC application. Higher expression of Ctgf and lower expression of Tnc and Fmod, respectively, were observed in the F+MC group in relation to F group (p < 0.05), and no difference was observed between the groups for the genes Tgfb, Fn1 and Scx. In cell migration, a higher number of cells in the scratch region was observed in group F+MC (p < 0.05) compared to group F on the 4th day, and the cell viability assay showed no difference between the groups. In conclusion, MC therapy at an intensity/time of 10 μA/90 s with 4 daily applications did not affect cell viability, stimulated fibroblasts migration with the involvement of Ctgf, and reduced the Tnc and Fmod expression.

Electrical stimulation for treating pressure ulcers

BACKGROUND

Pressure ulcers (also known as pressure sores, decubitus ulcers or bedsores) are localised injuries to the skin or underlying tissue, or both. Pressure ulcers are a disabling consequence of immobility. Electrical stimulation (ES) is widely used for the treatment of pressure ulcers. However, it is not clear whether ES is effective.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effects (benefits and harms) of electrical stimulation (ES) for treating pressure ulcers.

SEARCH METHODS

In July 2019 we searched the Cochrane Wounds Specialised Register; the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL); Ovid MEDLINE (including In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations); Ovid Embase and EBSCO CINAHL Plus. We also searched clinical trials registries for ongoing and unpublished studies, and scanned reference lists of relevant included studies as well as reviews, meta-analyses and health technology reports to identify additional studies. We did not impose any restrictions with respect to language, date of publication or study setting.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included published and unpublished randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing ES (plus standard care) with sham/no ES (plus standard care) for treating pressure ulcers.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently selected trials for inclusion, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias. We assessed the certainty of evidence using GRADE.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 20 studies with 913 participants. The mean age of participants ranged from 26 to 83 years; 50% were male. ES was administered for a median (interquartile range (IQR)) duration of five (4 to 8) hours per week. The chronicity of the pressure ulcers was variable, ranging from a mean of four days to more than 12 months. Most of the pressure ulcers were on the sacral and coccygeal region (30%), and most were stage III (45%). Half the studies were at risk of performance and detection bias, and 25% were at risk of attrition and selective reporting bias. Overall, the GRADE assessment of the certainty of evidence for outcomes was moderate to very low. Nineteen studies were conducted in four different settings, including rehabilitation and geriatric hospitals, medical centres, a residential care centre, and a community-based centre. ES probably increases the proportion of pressure ulcers healed compared with no ES (risk ratio (RR) 1.99, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.39 to 2.85; I² = 0%; 11 studies, 501 participants (512 pressure ulcers)). We downgraded the evidence to moderate certainty due to risk of bias. It is uncertain whether ES decreases pressure ulcer severity on a composite measure compared with no ES (mean difference (MD) -2.43, 95% CI -6.14 to 1.28; 1 study, 15 participants (15 pressure ulcers) and whether ES decreases the surface area of pressure ulcers when compared with no ES (12 studies; 494 participants (505 pressure ulcers)). Data for the surface area of pressure ulcers were not pooled because there was considerable statistical heterogeneity between studies (I² = 96%) but the point estimates for the MD of each study ranged from -0.90 cm² to 10.37 cm². We downgraded the evidence to very low certainty due to risk of bias, inconsistency and imprecision. It is uncertain whether ES decreases the time to complete healing of pressure ulcers compared with no ES (hazard ratio (HR) 1.06, 95% CI 0.47 to 2.41; I² = 0%; 2 studies, 55 participants (55 pressure ulcers)). We downgraded the evidence to very low certainty due to risk of bias, indirectness and imprecision. ES may be associated with an excess of, or difference in, adverse events (13 studies; 586 participants (602 pressure ulcers)). Data for adverse events were not pooled but the types of reported adverse events included skin redness, itchy skin, dizziness and delusions, deterioration of the pressure ulcer, limb amputation, and occasionally death. We downgraded the evidence to low certainty due to risk of selection and attrition bias and imprecision. ES probably increases the rate of pressure ulcer healing compared with no ES (MD 4.59% per week, 95% CI 3.49 to 5.69; I² = 25%; 12 studies, 561 participants (613 pressure ulcers)). We downgraded the evidence to moderate certainty due to risk of bias. We did not find any studies that looked at quality of life, depression, or consumers' perception of treatment effectiveness.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

ES probably increases the proportion of pressure ulcers healed and the rate of pressure ulcer healing (moderate certainty evidence), but its effect on time to complete healing is uncertain compared with no ES (very low certainty evidence). It is also uncertain whether ES decreases the surface area of pressure ulcers. The evidence to date is insufficient to support the widespread use of ES for pressure ulcers outside of research. Future research needs to focus on large-scale trials to determine the effect of ES on all key outcomes.

Monophasic Pulsed Microcurrent of 1-8 Hz Increases the Number of Human Dermal Fibroblasts

Objective

Pressure injuries seriously impact the quality of life of patients and increase public and private healthcare costs. Electrical stimulation therapy is recommended for wound contraction, and some clinical studies have shown that the application of a monophasic pulsed microcurrent can help to reduce the treatment period. However, the optimal stimulus conditions are unclear. The purpose of this study was to investigate the effect of different frequencies of monophasic pulsed microcurrent stimulation on the number and viability of human dermal fibroblasts.

Methods

Human dermal fibroblasts were electrically stimulated in vitro (intensity: 200 μA; frequency: 1, 2, 4, 8, 16, 32, and 64 Hz; duty factor: 50%) for 1 h three times every 24 h. Controls were unstimulated. Cell numbers and cell viability were assessed after each electrical stimulation session.

Results

In the 1-, 2-, 4-, and 8-Hz groups, cell numbers were significantly higher than those in the control group, whereas electrical stimulation at 64 Hz resulted in a decrease in cell numbers at 24 h after the third treatment (p < 0.05). Cell viability was high in both the control and low-frequency stimulation groups, with no significant differences between groups.

Conclusion

Application of 1-8 Hz monophasic pulsed microcurrent stimulation increased the number of human dermal fibroblasts in vitro, and is proposed as the optimal condition for accelerating the healing of pressure injuries.

Electrical Stimulation Technologies for Wound Healing

Objective: To discuss the physiological bases for using exogenously applied electric field (EF) energy to enhance wound healing with conductive electrical stimulation (ES) devices. Approach: To describe the types of electrical currents that have been reported to enhance chronic wound-healing rate and closure. Results: Commercial ES devices that generate direct current (DC), and mono and biphasic pulsed current waveforms represent the principal ES technologies which are reported to enhance wound healing. Innovation: Wafer-thin, disposable ES technologies (wound dressings) that utilize mini or micro-batteries to deliver low-level DC for wound healing and antibacterial wound-treatment purposes are commercially available. Microfluidic wound-healing chips are currently being used with greater accuracy to investigate the EF effects on cellular electrotaxis. Conclusion: Numerous clinical trials described in subsequent sections of this issue have demonstrated that ES used adjunctively with standard wound care (SWC), enhances wound healing rate faster than SWC alone.

Effects and mechanisms of a microcurrent dressing on skin wound healing: a review

The variety of wound types has resulted in a wide range of wound dressings, with new products frequently being introduced to target different aspects of the wound healing process. The ideal wound dressing should achieve rapid healing at a reasonable cost, with minimal inconvenience to the patient. Microcurrent dressing, a novel wound dressing with inherent electric activity, can generate low-level microcurrents at the device-wound contact surface in the presence of moisture and can provide an advanced wound healing solution for managing wounds. This article offers a review of the effects and mechanisms of the microcurrent dressing on the healing of skin wounds.

Galvanic microparticles increase migration of human dermal fibroblasts in a wound-healing model via reactive oxygen species pathway

Electrical signals have been implied in many biological mechanisms, including wound healing, which has been associated with transient electrical currents not present in intact skin. One method to generate electrical signals similar to those naturally occurring in wounds is by supplementation of galvanic particles dispersed in a cream or gel. We constructed a three-layered model of skin consisting of human dermal fibroblasts in hydrogel (mimic of dermis), a hydrogel barrier layer (mimic of epidermis) and galvanic microparticles in hydrogel (mimic of a cream containing galvanic particles applied to skin). Using this model, we investigated the effects of the properties and amounts of Cu/Zn galvanic particles on adult human dermal fibroblasts in terms of the speed of wound closing and gene expression. The collected data suggest that the effects on wound closing are due to the ROS-mediated enhancement of fibroblast migration, which is in turn mediated by the BMP/SMAD signaling pathway. These results imply that topical low-grade electric currents via microparticles could enhance wound healing.