CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 · Rev Bras Ortop (Sao Paulo) 2020; 55(03): 278-283
DOI: 10.1055/s-0039-3402457
Artigo Original
Básica
Sociedade Brasileira de Ortopedia e Traumatologia. Published by Thieme Revinter Publicações Ltda Rio de Janeiro, Brazil

Comparative Analysis of the Effect of Two Therapeutic Ultrasound Protocols for Regeneration of a Critical Bone Defect[]

Article in several languages: português | English
1  Laboratório de Bioengenharia Tecidual e Biomateriais (LBTB), Universidade Federal da Bahia (UFBA), Salvador, BA, Brasil
,
Isabela Cerqueira Barreto
2  Departamento de Biofunção, Laboratório de Bioengenharia Tecidual e Biomateriais (LBTB), Universidade Federal da Bahia (UFBA), Salvador, BA, Brasil
,
Renata dos Santos Almeida
1  Laboratório de Bioengenharia Tecidual e Biomateriais (LBTB), Universidade Federal da Bahia (UFBA), Salvador, BA, Brasil
,
Iorrana Índira dos Anjos Ribeiro
1  Laboratório de Bioengenharia Tecidual e Biomateriais (LBTB), Universidade Federal da Bahia (UFBA), Salvador, BA, Brasil
,
Aryon de Almeida Barbosa Junior
3  Laboratório de Bioengenharia Tecidual e Biomateriais (LBTB), Instituto de Patologia Geral e Cutânea (IPAC), Salvador, BA, Brasil
,
Fabiana Paim Rosa
4  Departamento de Biointeração, Laboratório de Bioengenharia Tecidual e Biomateriais (LBTB), Universidade Federal da Bahia (UFBA), Salvador, BA, Brasil
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

18 November 2018

19 March 2019

Publication Date:
27 February 2020 (online)

Abstract

Objective To compare the effect of two therapeutic ultrasound protocols, with different times of exposure in the regeneration of critical bone defect.

Methods Forty-five male rats were distributed among three experimental groups: therapeutic ultrasound group 5 minutes (TUG 5); therapeutic ultrasound group 10 minutes (TUG 10); and control group (CG). In all groups, a critical bone defect of 8.5 mm diameter was made in the calvaria region. The protocol was initiated on the 1st postoperative day in TUGs 5 and 10, with therapeutic ultrasound at the frequency of 1.0 MHz, pulsed mode, five times a week, at periods of 15, 30, and 60 days.

Results Among the experimental groups, the highest volume of neoformation of osteoid matrix took place in the TUG 10 group followed by TUG 5, when compared with the CG group, in which the neoformation was restricted to the border region. The use of ultrasound promoted an increase in the thickness of the conjunctive matrix, proliferation of capillaries, alignment of the collagen fibers, reduction of edema and inflammatory process, being more significant in the 10-minutes time period.

Conclusion Therapeutic ultrasound stimulated the repair of a critical bone defect, and the longer exposure time promoted greater osteogenic stimulation.

Study conducted at Universidade Federal da Bahia (UFBA), Salvador, BA, Brazil.