[The influence of microwave monochromatic radiation on bone fracture union in rabbits].

PAPER pubmed Chirurgia narzadow ruchu i ortopedia polska 1992 Animal study Effect: benefit Evidence: Low

Read original paper → PMID: 7555283 Evidence Lab

Abstract

The influence of 53.57 GHz microwave radiation of 10mW/cm2 power density on fresh radial bone fracture in 16 rabbits has been investigated. After osteotomy, the occipital area was irradiated one hour daily during two weeks. The development of bony union in experimental and control group (12 rabbits) were compared on the basis of radiographic and physical assessments on the 7-th, 14-th, 21-st and 28-th day after osteotomy. Favourable effect of microwave radiation on bone union was found, especially in the first 14 days after osteotomy. An intense periosteal reaction accompanied the healing process in experimental animals. Biochemical and morphological blood tests run simultaneously were standard.

AI evidence extraction

At a glance

Study type

Animal study

Effect direction

benefit

Population

Rabbits with fresh radial bone fracture after osteotomy

Sample size

Exposure

mmWave · 53570 MHz · 1 hour daily for 2 weeks

Evidence strength

Low

Confidence: 74% · Peer-reviewed: yes

Main findings

In rabbits, 53.57 GHz microwave radiation at 10 mW/cm2 applied to the occipital area for 1 hour daily over 2 weeks was associated with a favourable effect on radial bone fracture union compared with controls, particularly during the first 14 days after osteotomy. Experimental animals showed an intense periosteal reaction; blood biochemical and morphological tests were reported as standard.

Outcomes measured

Bone fracture union/healing (radiographic assessment)
Bone fracture union/healing (physical assessment)
Periosteal reaction
Blood biochemical tests
Blood morphological tests

Limitations

No details provided on randomization or blinding
Exposure applied to occipital area rather than directly to fracture site (mechanism unclear from abstract)
Small sample size and unclear allocation between experimental and control groups beyond noting 12 controls
No quantitative results or statistical analyses reported in the abstract

View raw extracted JSON

{
    "study_type": "animal",
    "exposure": {
        "band": "mmWave",
        "source": null,
        "frequency_mhz": 53570,
        "sar_wkg": null,
        "duration": "1 hour daily for 2 weeks"
    },
    "population": "Rabbits with fresh radial bone fracture after osteotomy",
    "sample_size": 16,
    "outcomes": [
        "Bone fracture union/healing (radiographic assessment)",
        "Bone fracture union/healing (physical assessment)",
        "Periosteal reaction",
        "Blood biochemical tests",
        "Blood morphological tests"
    ],
    "main_findings": "In rabbits, 53.57 GHz microwave radiation at 10 mW/cm2 applied to the occipital area for 1 hour daily over 2 weeks was associated with a favourable effect on radial bone fracture union compared with controls, particularly during the first 14 days after osteotomy. Experimental animals showed an intense periosteal reaction; blood biochemical and morphological tests were reported as standard.",
    "effect_direction": "benefit",
    "limitations": [
        "No details provided on randomization or blinding",
        "Exposure applied to occipital area rather than directly to fracture site (mechanism unclear from abstract)",
        "Small sample size and unclear allocation between experimental and control groups beyond noting 12 controls",
        "No quantitative results or statistical analyses reported in the abstract"
    ],
    "evidence_strength": "low",
    "confidence": 0.7399999999999999911182158029987476766109466552734375,
    "peer_reviewed_likely": "yes",
    "keywords": [
        "millimeter wave",
        "microwave radiation",
        "53.57 GHz",
        "10 mW/cm2",
        "rabbit",
        "bone fracture",
        "osteotomy",
        "fracture healing",
        "periosteal reaction"
    ],
    "suggested_hubs": []
}

AI can be wrong. Always verify against the paper.

AI-extracted fields are generated from the abstract/metadata and may be incomplete or incorrect. This content is for informational purposes only and is not medical advice.

Comments

No comments yet.