Dynamics of the level of endogenous intoxication during stimulation of osteogenesis by direct electric current

The aim of the study. To study the dynamics of changes in endogenous intoxication products in the blood serum of rabbits during leg bone lengthening according to Ilizarov under the influence of direct electric current on the regenerate zone.

Materials and methods. The study was performed on 49 male rabbits, which underwent leg bone lengthening according to Ilizarov. In both experimental groups, the procedure of electrical action on the bone was performed six times, repeating it after 48 hours. The current strength was 150 μA. The exposure time was 60 seconds. In the first group, the anode (+) of the device was connected to the spokes-electrodes distal to the osteotomy zone, the cathode (-) – proximal to the osteotomy. In the second group, the anode (+) was attached to the spokes-electrodes proximal to the osteotomy, the cathode (-) – distal to the osteotomy zone. Within the groups, the animals were divided into subgroups depending on the time of the onset of electrical exposure: immediately after surgery (subgroup 1.1, n = 11; subgroup 2.1, n = 9) and from 10 days after surgery (subgroup 1.2, n = 10; subgroup 2.2, n = 8). In the control group (n = 11), no electrical exposure was performed. Endogenous intoxication was assessed by the level of oligopeptides and substances of low and medium molecular weight (SLMM) in the blood serum.

Results. A significant increase in SLMM during the experiment was found only in the rabbits of the control group. The percentage of the catabolic pool among SLMM during the experiment was significantly increased in the animals of group 1.1 on the 5th day of distraction, for group 1.2 – from the 15th to the 20th day of distraction; in group 2.1 – on the 10th day of distraction; in group 2.2 – at the end of fixation. In all groups with electrical exposure, in contrast to the control, a decrease in the level of oligopeptides was noted during the period of fixation and up to 30 days after the removal of the device.

Conclusion. The effect of direct electric current on the distraction regenerate did not cause a significant increase in the products of endogenous intoxication in the blood of laboratory animals under the studied application modes.

1. Aifantis I.D., Ampadiotaki M.M., Pallis D., et al. Biophysical Enhancement in Fracture Healing: A Review of the Literature. Cureus. 2023. 15(4). e37704. doi: 10.7759/cureus.37704

2. Ding N., Zhou F., Li G., et al. Quantum dots for bone tissue engineering. Mater Today Bio. 2024. 28. 101167. doi: 10.1016/j.mtbio.2024.101167

3. Ibrahim A., Gupton M., Schroeder F. Regenerative Medicine in Orthopedic Surgery: Expanding Our Toolbox. Cureus. 2024. 16(9). e68487. doi: 10.7759/cureus.68487

4. Ovchinnikov E.N., Stogov M.V. Stimulation of osteogenesis by direct electric current (review). Travmatologiya i ortopediya Rossii. 2019. 3. 185-191. doi: 10.21823/2311-2905-2019-25-3-185-191. in Russian.

5. Flatscher J., Pavez Loriè E., Mittermayr R., et al. Pulsed Electromagnetic Fields (PEMF)-Physiological Response and Its Potential in Trauma Treatment. Int J Mol Sci. 2023. 24(14). 11239. doi: 10.3390/ijms241411239

6. Luo S., Zhang C., Xiong W., et al. Advances in electroactive biomaterials: Through the lens of electrical stimulation promoting bone regeneration strategy. J Orthop Translat. 2024. 47. 191-206. doi: 10.1016/j.jot.2024.06.009

7. Klinder A., Möws F., Ziebart J., et al. Effects of electrical stimulation with alternating fields on the osseointegration of titanium implants in the rabbit tibia - a pilot study. Front Bioeng Biotechnol. 2024. 12. 1395715. doi: 10.3389/fbioe.2024.1395715

8. Wang A., Ma X., Bian J., et al. Signalling pathways underlying pulsed electromagnetic fields in bone repair. Front Bioeng Biotechnol. 2024. 12. 1333566. doi: 10.3389/fbioe.2024.1333566

9. Pettersen E., Anderson J., Ortiz-Catalan M. Electrical stimulation to promote osseointegration of bone anchoring implants: a topical review. J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2022. 19(1). 31. doi: 10.1186/s12984-022-01005-7

10. Dechent D., Emonds T., Stunder D., et al. Direct current electrical injuries: A systematic review of case reports and case series. Burns. 2020. 46(2). 267-278. doi: 10.1016/j.burns.2018.11.020

11. Ganse B. Methods to accelerate fracture healing - a narrative review from a clinical perspective. Front Immunol. 2024. 15. 1384783. doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2024.1384783

12. Ovchinnikov E.N., Filimonova G.N., Dyuryagina O.V., Tushina N.V., Kireeva E.A. The effect of various modes of electrical influence on the skeletal muscles of the lengthened -segment during distraction of the lower leg according to Ilizarov. Kazanskiy meditsinskiy zhurnal. 2024. 1. 73-83. doi: 10.17816/KMJ465709. in Russian.

13. Danilova L.A. editors. Handbook of laboratory research methods. Saint Petersburg. Piter. 2003. in Russian.

14. Khrulev A.E., Grigor'eva V.N., Khrulev S.E. Mechanisms of the damage and morphological changes in nervous system in case of electrical trauma. Saratovskiy nauchno-meditsinskiy zhurnal. 2010. 2. 374-377. in Russian.

15. Ryabykh S.O., Silant'eva T.A., Dyuryagina O.V., et al. Development of porous titanium implants for interbody fusion. Genij Ortopedii. 2021. 6. 773-781. doi: 10.18019/1028-4427-2021-27-6-773-781. in Russian.