الفهرس 
IntroductionOnly 14 pages are availabe for public view
 |  | from | 178 |  |  |
| | | from | 178 | | |
Abstract
Bone healing is a complex biological process. It takes a relatively long time, so it may cause complication that eventually lead to a loss of manpower and raised costs . Although millions of fractures occur annually and the majority of which heals satisfactorily, but 5-10% of fractures goes on to delayed union or non-union. The impaired fracture healing results in pseudoarthrothosis or skeletal deformity that causes functional disability. In this study, the effect of PEMF on fracture healing was evaluated in rabbit tibiae. The right tibia of 95 rabbits were fractured under general anaesthesia. They were assigned randomly to three equal groups.-Group ? in which rabbits received daily treatment with PEMF of 1.6 mT. in intensity, 15 Hz in frequency and for 30 minutes.-Group ? in which rabbits received daily treatment with PEMF of 1.6 mT. in intensity, 15 Hz in frequency and for 60 minutes.-Group ? in which rabbits received no treatment and were left to heal spontaneously. The fracture healing was assessed by radiological and histopathological assessments at 14th, 21st and 28th days after fracture. Radiological results: - -There was a significant difference between the two treated groups and the control group, throughout the experiment, as regarding radiological bone healing score. This evidenced by earlier callus formation in group ? (30 minutes treatment) and ? (60-minutes treatment) than the control group. -But when comparing group ? and group ? there was no significant difference between the two groups as regarding radiological healing score and this finding persist throughout the study. Histopathological results: - There was no tissue damage in any of the examined sections indicating the safety of the applied treatment modality. On the 14th day mature cartilage was predominant in the two treated groups while fibrous tissue dominate in the control group. On the 21st day calcification of the cartilage with new bone formation was observed in the two treated groups, while the control group showed a predominantly cartilaginous tissue. On the 28th day there was evidences of bone remodeling reaching mature lamellar bone in-group ? and group ?, while the control group still shows some cartilaginous tissue with the new bone formation. There was a significant difference when comparing the two treated groups with the control group. But when comparing group ? with group ? there was a non-significant difference between the two groups. Conclusion PEMF stimulation provides non-invasive safe modality that can be used as an adjuvant therapy for fracture healing. Even that short exposure of PEMF was found to be of beneficial in bone healing. Recommendation We recommend the use of PEMF for acceleration of fresh fracture healing. Also we recommend the use of 30-minutes exposure for achieving good results, thus encouraging the patients to continue treatment in order to regain their activities quickly and hence saving their time and money.