CAJ | 학술논문

目的：探索脉冲电磁场联合电针疗法对去卵巢大鼠骨质疏松的影响。方法将50只SD雌性大鼠随机分为假手术组、去势组、脉冲电磁场组、电针组和联合组,每组10只。除假手术组外,各组大鼠行双侧卵巢切除术,假手术组大鼠只切除卵巢周围与卵巢大小相仿的脂肪组织。去除卵巢术后1周,假手术组和去势组不作任何干预,脉冲电磁场组给予脉冲电磁场治疗、电针组给予电针治疗,联合组同时给予脉冲电磁场和电针治疗。干预12周后处死实验动物,取左股骨和L5椎体进行骨密度检测及生物力学检测；取左胫骨观察组织形态学变化。结果脉冲电磁场、电针和联合治疗能增加去势大鼠左股骨骨密度(P＜0.01,P＜0.05)；而脉冲电磁场组、电针组和联合组3组之间股骨骨密度无统计学差异(P＞0.05)；脉冲电磁场、电针和联合治疗能增加L5椎体骨密度(P＜0.01)；与脉冲电磁场组和电针组比较,联合组L5椎体骨密度明显增高(P＜0.05)。脉冲电磁场、电针和联合疗法均能增加骨小梁面积、骨小梁数量和骨小梁链接数,减少骨髓腔的大小。脉冲电磁场和联合治疗能增加去势大鼠股骨最大载荷(P＜0.05)；而脉冲电磁场组、电针组和联合组3组之间最大载荷无统计学差异(P＞0.05)。脉冲电磁场、电针和联合治疗能增加L5椎体最大载荷(P＜0.01)；与脉冲电磁场组和电针组比较,联合组最大载荷明显增高(P＜0.05,P＜0.01)。脉冲电磁场、电针和联合治疗能增加L5椎体破坏能(P＜0.01)；与脉冲电磁场组和电针组比较,联合组破坏能明显增高(P＜0.01)。结论脉冲电磁场联合电针疗法在增加腰椎椎体骨密度,改善腰椎椎体骨生物力学性能方面优于脉冲电磁场或电针疗法单独使用。
목적：탐색맥충전자장연합전침요법대거란소대서골질소송적영향。방법장50지SD자성대서수궤분위가수술조、거세조、맥충전자장조、전침조화연합조,매조10지。제가수술조외,각조대서행쌍측란소절제술,가수술조대서지절제란소주위여란소대소상방적지방조직。거제란소술후1주,가수술조화거세조불작임하간예,맥충전자장조급여맥충전자장치료、전침조급여전침치료,연합조동시급여맥충전자장화전침치료。간예12주후처사실험동물,취좌고골화L5추체진행골밀도검측급생물역학검측；취좌경골관찰조직형태학변화。결과맥충전자장、전침화연합치료능증가거세대서좌고골골밀도(P＜0.01,P＜0.05)；이맥충전자장조、전침조화연합조3조지간고골골밀도무통계학차이(P＞0.05)；맥충전자장、전침화연합치료능증가L5추체골밀도(P＜0.01)；여맥충전자장조화전침조비교,연합조L5추체골밀도명현증고(P＜0.05)。맥충전자장、전침화연합요법균능증가골소량면적、골소량수량화골소량련접수,감소골수강적대소。맥충전자장화연합치료능증가거세대서고골최대재하(P＜0.05)；이맥충전자장조、전침조화연합조3조지간최대재하무통계학차이(P＞0.05)。맥충전자장、전침화연합치료능증가L5추체최대재하(P＜0.01)；여맥충전자장조화전침조비교,연합조최대재하명현증고(P＜0.05,P＜0.01)。맥충전자장、전침화연합치료능증가L5추체파배능(P＜0.01)；여맥충전자장조화전침조비교,연합조파배능명현증고(P＜0.01)。결론맥충전자장연합전침요법재증가요추추체골밀도,개선요추추체골생물역학성능방면우우맥충전자장혹전침요법단독사용。
Objective To explore whether combination treatment with pulsed electromagnetic fields ( PEMFs) and electroacupuncture ( EA) have additive benefits on bone mineral density( BMD) and biomechanical properties in OVX rats. Methods Fifty 3-month old female Sprague-Dawley rats were assigned to one of five groups:sham-operated control ( Sham) ,ovariectomy ( OVX) ,ovariectomy with PEMFs treatment ( PEMFs) ,ovariectomy with EA treatment ( EA) ,and o-variectomy with PEMFs﹢EA treatment ( PEMFs﹢EA) . After 12-week treatments,bone mineral density,histomorphometric parameters,and bone biomechanical properties were examined. Results PEMFs,EA and combination treatment signifi-cantly increased BMD of the femur (P<0. 01,P<0. 05) compared to OVX group. There was no significant difference in the femur BMD among the five groups(P>0. 05). PEMFs,EA and combination treatment significantly increased BMD of L5 vertebral body (P<0. 01) compared to OVX group. What’s more,combination treatment with PEMFs and EA was more ef-fective than PEMFs or EA alone for improving BMD in L5 vertebral body(P<0. 05). The biomechanical three-point ben-ding experiment showed that PEMFs and combination treatment significantly increased maximum load in the left femur com-pared to OVX group (P<0. 05). There was no significant difference in maximum load of the left femur among the five groups(P>0. 05). The compression test showed that PEMFs,EA and combination treatment significantly increased maxi-mum load (P<0. 01) and energy to failure (P<0. 01) in L5 vertebral body compared to OVX group. What’s more,combi-nation treatment was more effective than PEMFs or EA alone for improving maximum load (P<0. 05,P<0. 01) and energy to failure (P<0. 01) in L5 vertebral body. Conclusions Combination treatment with PEMFs and EA have additive ben-efits on BMD and bone biomechanical properties in the lumbar vertebral body.