电场与磁场复合疗法对骨质疏松治疗的初步研究

发布时间：2018-04-21 15:37

本文选题：电容耦合电场 + 低频脉冲电磁场　；参考：《重庆大学》2014年硕士论文

【摘要】：随着老龄化的加剧，骨质疏松患者的人数也在逐年增加，目前已然跃居常见病、多发病的第七位。全世界骨质疏松患者达2亿之多，其引起的骨折越来越多，呈现上升趋势。骨质疏松症是以骨量减少、骨的显微结构退化为特征的，致使骨的脆性增加以及易于发生骨折的一种全身性骨骼疾病。骨质疏松的类型共3种，，而绝经后型属于人数最多的一种。治疗方法很多且各有优劣。随着生物医学工程的发展，电磁场治疗的诸多优点被人们逐步的认识，其中低频脉冲磁场与电容耦合电场就是治疗骨质疏松的有效的方法。本课题采用PEMFs与CCPEF配合治疗，通过卵巢切除法建立骨质疏松动物模型来验证该治疗方法的效果。探讨该方法的治疗效果与两者单一治疗的效果，比较何种方法更佳。动物选取与分组：选用3月龄大小的雌性SD大鼠，体重为250±20g，50只，随机分成5组：Blank组、Contrast组、PEMFs组、CCPEF组、PEMFs+CCPEF组。方案：Blank组进行假手术，其余4组制作动物模型。模型完成后4周进行治疗，Blank组与Contrast组：不进行任何刺激；PEMFs组：将大鼠放入自行设计的饲养笼内，暴露在频率为15Hz，强度为0.4mT的低频脉冲磁场中，8小时/天，连续治疗12周；CCPEF组：乙醚麻醉后，将大鼠放于自制的耦合电容平行板之间，刺激频率为1.5MHz，强度为20Vpp，每天一次，每次20分钟，每周5次，连续治疗55次。PEMFs+CCPEF组：首先进行PEMFs暴露治疗，方案跟PEMFs组一样；然后进行CCPEF暴露治疗，治疗方案跟CCPEF组一样，即两者配合治疗。采样数据：身体状况观察及体重测量、尿液的收集、血液的采集、摘取脏器并称重、生物力学性能的测定。结果：从体重变化、子宫系数、生化指标、骨最大应力数据参数中，Contrast组与Blank组相比较，均具有显著的变化，P 0.01，说明动物模型制作成功；PEMFs组、CCPEF组、PEMFs+CCPEF组这3组与Contrast组相比较，均具有一定的差异，P 0.05，说明PEMFs、CCPEF、PEMFs+CCPEF这3中治疗方式均具有治疗骨质疏松的作用；PEMFs组与CCPEF组比较，无显著差异，说明低频脉冲电磁场与电容耦合电场治疗效果差不多，各有优缺点；PEMFs+CCPEF组与PEMFs组、CCPEF组比较，除了Ca、P、ALP参数数据外，其他参数均具有一定的变化，P 0.05，说明电容耦合电场配合低频脉冲电磁场的治疗方式比它们单一的治疗方式效果更好。
[Abstract]:With the aggravation of aging, the number of osteoporosis patients is increasing year by year. There are more than 200 million osteoporosis patients in the world, and more and more fractures are caused by it. Osteoporosis is a systemic bone disease characterized by the reduction of bone mass and the degeneration of bone microstructure, which increases the fragility of bone and is prone to fracture. There are three types of osteoporosis, and the postmenopausal type is the most numerous. There are many methods of treatment and each has its own advantages and disadvantages. With the development of biomedical engineering, many advantages of electromagnetic field therapy have been gradually recognized, among which low-frequency pulsed magnetic field and capacitive coupling electric field is an effective method for the treatment of osteoporosis. In this study, PEMFs combined with CCPEF was used to establish an animal model of osteoporosis by ovariectomy. To explore the therapeutic effect of this method and the effect of single treatment, compared with which method is better. Animal selection and grouping: 50 female Sprague-Dawley rats aged 3 months, weighing 250 卤20 g / g, were randomly divided into 5 groups: control group (n = 5): Contrast group (n = 5): CCPEF group (n = 10) and PEMFs group (n = 50). Plan: Blank group for sham-operation, the other four groups to make animal models. Four weeks after the completion of the model, the two groups were treated with Contrast: the rats were exposed to low frequency pulsed magnetic field (0.4mT) with frequency of 15 Hz and intensity of 0.4mT for 8 hours per day without any stimulation, and the rats were placed in a self-designed cage, and the rats were exposed to a low frequency pulsed magnetic field with a frequency of 15 Hz and an intensity of 0.4mT for 8 hours per day. After 12 weeks of continuous treatment with CCPEF, the rats were placed between the self-made coupling capacitor parallel plates, the stimulation frequency was 1.5 MHz, the intensity was 20 Vpp. once a day, 20 minutes a week, 5 times a week. Continuous treatment for 55 times. PEMFs CCPEF group: first, PEMFs exposure treatment, the same scheme as PEMFs group, then CCPEF exposure therapy, the same treatment as CCPEF group, that is, the combination of both groups. Sampling data: body condition observation and weight measurement, urine collection, blood collection, organ extraction and weighing, biomechanical performance measurement. Results: compared with Blank group, the weight change, uterine coefficient, biochemical index and bone maximum stress data of Contrast group were significantly different from those of Blank group (P 0.01), which indicated that the three groups of CCPEF group were compared with Contrast group. There was no significant difference between PEMFs group and CCPEF group, which indicated that the effect of PEMFs CCPEFF CCPEF on osteoporosis was similar to that of CCPEF group, indicating that the effect of low frequency pulsed electromagnetic field was similar to that of capacitive coupled electric field, and that there was no significant difference between PEMFs group and CCPEF group in the treatment of Osteoporosis, which indicated that there was no significant difference between PEMFs group and CCPEF group. Compared with the PEMFs group, the other parameters of PEMFs CCPEF group have some changes (P 0.05), which indicates that the capacitive coupled electric field combined with low frequency pulse electromagnetic field is more effective than their single treatment method.
【学位授予单位】：重庆大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2014
【分类号】：R580

【参考文献】