Laser vs / or combined with PEMF

Lasers Med Sci. 2015 Aug 26. [Epub ahead of print]

LASER versus electromagnetic field in treatment of hemarthrosis in children with hemophilia.

Eid MA1, Aly SM.

Author information

  • 1Department of Physical Therapy, College of Applied Medical Sciences, Najran University, Najran, KSA, Saudi Arabia, mohamed.eid27@yahoo.com.

Abstract

Children with hemophilia usually have recurrent joint bleeding that leads to joint damage, loss of range of motion, and restriction of mobility, therefore affecting the quality of life in these children. The purpose of this study was to compare the effects of low-level laser therapy (LLLT) to that of pulsed electromagnetic field (PEMF) in treatment of hemarthrosis in children with hemophilia. Thirty boys with hemophilia A with ages ranging from 9 to 13 years were selected and assigned randomly, using sealed envelopes, into two equal intervention groups. The study group I received the traditional physical therapy program in addition to LLLT, whereas the study group II received the same physical therapy program given to the study group I in addition to PEMF. Both groups received the treatment sessions three times per week for three successive months. Pain, laboratory investigations, swelling, and range of motion (ROM) of the affected knee joint, in addition to physical fitness were evaluated before, at the end of the sixth week and at 12 weeks of the treatment program. Laser group showed significant improvement in all measured variables after the sixth week of treatment when compared with PEMF. By 12 weeks of treatment, there was a significant improvement in pain, ROM, ESR and leucocytes levels in laser group compared with PEMF, while there was no significant difference in knee circumferences and the 6-min walk test (6MWT) between both groups. Both groups showed significant improvement at 12 weeks of treatment compared with that at 6 weeks. Both LLLT and PEMF are effective modalities in reducing pain, swelling, increasing ROM and improving physical fitness. Twelve weeks of treatment of both modalities demonstrated significant improvement than 6 weeks of treatment. Laser therapy induced significant improvement than electromagnetic therapy in treatment of hemarthrosis-related problems in children with hemophilia.

 
J Maxillofac Oral Surg. 2014 Dec;13(4):451-7. doi: 10.1007/s12663-013-0551-2. Epub 2013 Jul 26.

Radiodensitometric Assessment of the Effect of Pulsed Electromagnetic Field Stimulation Versus Low Intensity Laser Irradiation on Mandibular Fracture Repair: A Preliminary Clinical Trial.

Refai H1, Radwan D1, Hassanien N1.

Author information

  • 1Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Faculty of Oral and Dental Medicine, Cairo University, Cairo, Egypt.

Abstract

PURPOSE:

Closed reduction of mandibular fractures usually entails a relatively long period of immobilization, with the subsequent delay of rehabilitation. Therefore, shorter immobilization period with various approaches to protect or enhance bone healing have been investigated. The aim of this study was to analyze the effects of pulsed electromagnetic field (PEMF) and low intensity laser irradiation (LILI) on the fracture healing process, through radiodensitometric assessment of the bone callus.

PATIENTS AND METHODS:

Eighteen patients with mandibular fractures at the tooth bearing area participated in this prospective study. They were treated by closed reduction using maxillo-mandibular fixation (MMF) and were consecutively assigned into 1 of 3 groups. In group A, the fracture sites were exposed to PEMF for 2 h daily for 12 days. In group B, the fracture sites were exposed to LILI on the tenth and twelfth postoperative days (2 sessions of 6 min per day 2 h apart). The fracture sites in group C acted as controls. MMF was maintained for 2 weeks in group A and 4 weeks in groups B and C. The bone fracture healing was evaluated clinically by investigating the union of the fractured segments and radiographically using computerized densitometry. The union of the fractured segments was tested by manual manipulation and the occlusion was assessed upon removal of MMF. Standardized digital panoramic radiographs were performed for each patient, immediately postoperatively as well as at 2 and 4 weeks. The digital images were manipulated using the IDRISI software. A rectangular area of 10 × 15 mm was drawn along the center of the fracture line. The obtained densitometry values were expressed in gray levels from 0 to 256. The collected data were then tabulated and statistically analyzed.

RESULTS:

After releasing the MMF, the bimanual mobility test of the fractured segments in all patients showed stability of the segments. The preinjury occlusion was maintained in all patients. The postoperative radiographs of all patients revealed good bony alignment of the bony segments. In all groups, comparison between the study intervals with respect to both means and changes percentages of the bone density values showed insignificant differences. At 2nd postoperative week, the mean bone density at the fracture sites decreased by 4.74, 6.6 and 27.89 % in groups A, B and C respectively. The period from the 2nd to the 4th postoperative weeks showed increase in the bone density by 1.49, 1.95 and 14.12 % in groups A, B and C respectively. Insignificant difference was found between the means of bone densities of group A and B throughout the study intervals. On the other hand, both groups showed insignificant difference with group C immediately postoperative and significant increase in bone density at the 2nd and 4th postoperative weeks.

CONCLUSIONS:

Short period immobilization of mandibular fractures for 2 weeks supplemented with PEMF is recommended. Further studies are needed to evaluate the efficacy of LILI as a supplement to reduce the mandibular fracture immobilization period.