单腔膝关节置换术后脉冲电磁疗法的疗效评估

封面


如何引用文章

全文:

开放存取 开放存取
受限制的访问 ##reader.subscriptionAccessGranted##
受限制的访问 订阅或者付费存取

详细

背景。脉冲电磁场疗法(Pulsed Electromagnetic Field Therapy, PEMF)已纳入膝关节置换术术后康复的临床指南。然而,其适应症仍然有限,主要用于缓解术后早期活动时的疼痛。

研究目的。评估接受 单腔膝关节置换术患者在术后应用 PEMF治疗 的镇痛效果和临床疗效,并与 假PEMF治疗的对照组 进行比较。评估指标包括 膝关节功能,整体健康状况,膝关节肿胀的客观与主观评估,非甾体抗炎药(NSAIDs)使用情况,持续性疼痛,日常活动受限情况 以及 并发症发生率。

材料与方法。本研究为 前瞻性,随机,安慰剂对照研究,共纳入72例接受内侧单腔膝关节置换术的患者。所有参与者 随机分为对照组(假PEMF治疗)或治疗组(PEMF治疗)。PEMF 组:建议患者每天接受4次 PEMF 治疗,每次20分钟,持续 60 天。评估时间点:术前以及术后1个月,2个月,6个月,12个月和36个月。对照组:按照相同的时间节点接受 假PEMF 治疗。临床评估指标:疼痛评分视觉模拟评分(Visual Analog Scale, VAS);膝关节功能评分牛津膝关节评分(Oxford Knee Score, OKS);整体健康状况短表健康调查问卷(Short Form-36, SF-36);膝关节肿胀:主观评估患者问卷调查,客观评估膝关节周径测量)。记录每次随访时的NSAIDs使用情况。

结果:在随访期间,两组VAS评分均下降,但在术后6个月(p=0.0143),12个月(p=0.0004) 和36个月(p=0.0213),PEMF组的疼痛缓解显著优于对照组。术后1个月,PEMF组和对照组中分别有73%和91%的患者服用 NSAIDs(p=0.0341)。术后2个月,PEMF组14%的患者仍在使用 NSAIDs,而对照组为38%(p=0.0326)。客观膝关节周径测量 显示,在术后6个月(p=0.0232),12个月(p=0.0016)和36个月(p=0.0004),PEMF组的膝关节肿胀改善更显著。主观膝关节肿胀评分 显示,在术后2个月(p=0.0064),6个月(p=0.0005),12个月(p=0.00022)和36个月(p=0.00031),PEMF组的肿胀程度均明显低于对照组。膝关节功能(OKS 评分) 在所有随访时间点均显示PEMF组显著优于对照组(1 个月:p=0.0258;2 个月:p=0.0014;6 个月:p=0.0003;12 个月:p=0.0002;36 个月:p=0.0144)。

结论。相较于 对照组,PEMF 治疗可显著缓解术后疼痛,提高术后康复效果,并减少 NSAIDs 的使用,适用于接受 单腔膝关节置换术的患者。

全文:

受限制的访问

作者简介

Yury Yu. Byalovsky

Ryazan State Medical University

编辑信件的主要联系方式.
Email: b_uu@mail.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0002-6769-8277
SPIN 代码: 6389-6643

MD, Dr. Sci. (Med.), Professor

俄罗斯联邦, Ryazan

Sergey Iv. Glotov

Ryazan State Medical University

Email: sergeyglot@mail.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0002-4445-4480
SPIN 代码: 7524-9816

MD, Cand. Sci. (Med.), Associate Professor

俄罗斯联邦, Ryazan

Irina S. Rakitina

Ryazan State Medical University

Email: rakitina62@gmail.com
ORCID iD: 0000-0002-9406-1765
SPIN 代码: 8427-9471

MD, Cand. Sci. (Med.), Associate Professor

俄罗斯联邦, Ryazan

Marina Yu. Mareeva

Moscow Regional Scientific Research Institute of Obstetrics and Gynecology

Email: аkmoniiag@mail.ru
俄罗斯联邦, Moscow

参考

  1. Clinical guidelines «Rehabilitation after knee arthroplasty». Builova TV, Tsykunov MB, eds. Moscow, 2015. (In Russ.)
  2. Mittal A, Meshram P, Kim WH, Kim TK. Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty, an enigma, and the ten enigmas of medial UKA. J Orthop Traumatol. 2020;21(1):15. doi: 10.1186/s10195-020-00551-x
  3. Grushina TI, Tepliakov VV. Physiotherapy in early rehabilitation of patients with bone sarcomas after arthroplasty of large bones and joints. Problems of Balneology, Physiotherapy and Exercise Therapy. 2020;97(3):53–59. doi: 10.17116/kurort20209703153
  4. Langkilde A, Jakobsen TL, Bandholm TQ, et al. Inflammation and post-operative recovery in patients undergoing total knee arthroplasty-secondary analysis of a randomized controlled trial. Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 2017;25(8):1265–73. doi: 10.1016/j.joca.2017.03.008
  5. Massari L, Benazzo F, Falez F, et al. Biophysical stimulation of bone and cartilage: state of the art and future perspectives. Int Orthop. 2019;43:539–551. doi: 10.1007/s00264-018-4274-3
  6. Paish HL, Baldock TE, Gillespie CS, et al. Chronic, active inflammation in patients with failed total knee replacements undergoing revision surgery. J Orthop Res. 2019;37(11):2316–24. doi: 10.1002/jor.24398
  7. Prince N, Penatzer JA, Dietz MJ, Boyd JW. Localized cytokine responses to total knee arthroplasty and total knee revision complications. J Transl Med. 2020;8(1):330. doi: 10.1186/s12967-020-02510-w
  8. Sellam J, Berenbaum F. The role of synovitis in pathophysiology and clinical symptoms of osteoarthritis. Nat Rev Rheumatol. 2010;6(11):625–35. doi: 10.1038/nrrheum.2010.159
  9. Varani K, Vincenzi F, Ravani A, et al. Adenosine receptors as a biological pathway for the anti-inflammatory and beneficial effects of low frequency low energy pulsed electromagnetic fields. Mediators Inflamm. 2017;2017:2740963. doi: 10.1155/2017/2740963
  10. Karateev DE, Makevnina AV, Luchikhina EL, et al. Efficiency and safety of magnetic therapy using a portable device in the treatment of osteoarthritis of the knee joints: results of a double-blind 55-week study. Voprosy kurortologii, fizioterapii i lechebnoj fizicheskoj kul'tury. 2021;98(5):53–65. doi: 10.17116/kurort20219805153
  11. Bagheri L, Pellati A, Rizzo P, et al. Notch pathway is active during osteogenic differentiation of human bone marrow mesenchymal stem cells induced by pulsed electromagnetic fields. J Tissue Eng Regen Med. 2018;12:304–315. doi: 10.1002/term.2455
  12. Wu S, Yu Q, Lai A, Tian J. Pulsed electromagnetic field induces Ca2+-dependent osteoblastogenesis in C3H10T1/2 mesenchymal cells through the Wnt-Ca2+/Wnt-β-catenin signaling pathway. Biochem Biophys Res Commun. 2018;503:715–721. doi: 10.1016/j.bbrc.2018.06.066
  13. Collarile M, Sambri A, Lullini G, et al. Biophysical stimulation improves clinical results of matrix-assisted autologous chondrocyte implantation in the treatment of chondral lesions of the knee. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2018;26(4):1223–9. doi: 10.1007/s00167-017-4605-8
  14. Byalovsky YU, Ivanov AV, Larinsky NE, Sekirin AB. Local pulsed magnetic therapy with the ALMAG+ device in the complex treatment of patients with osteoarthritis. Vrach. 2018;29(12):3–5. doi: 10.29296/25877305-2018-12-19
  15. Zhang Q, Zhang Q, Guo W, et al. The learning curve for minimally invasive Oxford phase 3 unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: cumulative summation test for learning curve (LC-CUSUM). J Orthop Surg Res. 2014;9:81. doi: 10.1186/s13018-014-0081-8
  16. Heller GZ, Manuguerra M, Chow R. How to analyze the visual Analogue scale: myths, truths and clinical relevance. Scand J Pain. 2016;13:67–75. doi: 10.1016/j.sjpain.2016.06.012
  17. Padua R, Zanoli G, Ceccarelli E, et al. The Italian version of the Oxford 12-item Knee Questionnaire-cross-cultural adaptation and validation. Int Orthop. 2003;27(4):214–6. doi: 10.1007/s00264-003-0453-x
  18. Apolone G, Mosconi P. The Italian SF-36 Health Survey: translation, validation and norming. J Clin Epidemiol. 1998;51(11):1025–36. doi: 10.1016/s08954356(98)00094-8
  19. Soderberg GL, Ballantyne BT, Kestel LL. Reliability of lower extremity girth measurements after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Physiother Res Int. 1996;1(1):7–16. doi: 10.1002/pri.43
  20. Agel J, LaPrade RF. Assessment of differences between the modified Cincinnati and International Knee Documentation Committee patient outcome scores: a prospective study. Am J Sports Med. 2009;37(11):2151–7. doi: 10.1177/0363546509337698
  21. Downie WW, Leatham PA, Rhind VM, et al. Studies with pain rating scales. Ann Rheum Dis. 1978;37(4):378–81.
  22. Johal S, Nakano N, Baxter M, et al. Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: the past, current controversies, and future perspectives. J Knee Surg. 2018;31(10):992–8. doi: 10.1055/s-0038-1625961
  23. Mathis DT, Hauser A, Iordache E, et al. Typical pain patterns in unhappy patients after total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 2021;36(6):1947–57. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2021.01.040
  24. Adravanti P, Nicoletti S, Setti S, et al. Effect of pulsed electromagnetic field therapy in patients undergoing total knee arthroplasty: a randomised controlled trial. Int Orthop. 2014;38(2):397–403. doi: 10.1007/s00264-013-2216-7
  25. Jennings JM, Kleeman-Forsthuber LT, Bolognesi MP. Medial unicompartmental arthroplasty of the knee. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2019;27(5):166–76. doi: 10.5435/JAAOS-D-17-00690
  26. van der List JP, Zuiderbaan HA, Pearle AD. Why do medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasties fail today? J Arthroplasty. 2016;31(5):1016–21. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2015.11.030
  27. Baker PN, Petheram T, Avery PJ, et al. Revision for unexplained pain following unicompartmental and total knee replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2012;94(17):e126. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.K.00791
  28. Park CN, Zuiderbaan HA, Chang A, et al. Role of magnetic resonance imaging in the diagnosis of the painful unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. Knee. 2015;22(4):341–6. doi: 10.1016/j.knee.2015.03.007
  29. Ongaro A, Varani K, Masieri FF, et al. Electromagnetic fields (EMFs) and adenosine receptors modulate prostaglandin E(2) and cytokine release in human osteoarthritic synovial fibroblasts. J Cell Physiol. 2012;227(6):2461–9. doi: 10.1002/jcp.22981
  30. Moretti B, Notarnicola A, Moretti L, et al. I-ONE therapy in patients undergoing total knee arthroplasty: a prospective, randomized and controlled study. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2012;13:88. doi: 10.1186/1471-2474-13-88
  31. La Verde L, Franceschetti E, Palumbo A, et al. Applicazione dei campi magnetici pulsati nei pazienti sottoposti a protesi inversa di spalla: valutazione clinica e funzionale. G Ital Ortop Traumatol. 2019;45(1):37–46. doi: 10.32050/0390-0134-116
  32. Yang X, He H, Ye W, et al. Effects of pulsed electromagnetic field therapy on pain, stiffness, physical function, and quality of life in patients with osteoarthritis: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized placebo-controlled trials. Phys Ther. 2020;100(7):1118–31. doi: 10.1093/ptj/pzaa054
  33. Vigano M, Perucca Orfei C, Ragni E, et al. Pain and functional scores in patients affected by knee OA after treatment with pulsed electromagnetic and magnetic fields: a meta-analysis. Cartilage. 2021;13(1_ suppl):1749S–61S. doi: 10.1177/1947603520931168
  34. Massari L, Benazzo F, Falez F, et al. Biophysical stimulation of bone and cartilage: state of the art and future perspectives. Int Orthop. 2019;43(3):539–51. doi: 10.1007/s00264018-4274-3
  35. Fuzier R, Serres I, Bourrel R, et al. Analgesic drug consumption increases after knee arthroplasty: a pharmacoepidemiological study investigating postoperative pain. Pain. 2014;155(7):1339–45. doi: 10.1016/j.pain.2014.04.010
  36. Gladkova EV, Babushkina IV, Ulyanov VYu, Mamonova IA. Chronic endotoxemia and features of the systemic inflammatory response in a number of patients with osteoarthritis requiring primary arthroplasty of large joints. Rossijskij mediko-biologicheskij vestnik imeni akademika I.P. Pavlova. 2022;30(1):87–94. doi: 10.17816/PAVLOVJ70537
  37. Kaminsky AV, Matveeva EL, Gasanova AG, et al. Analysis of biochemical parameters of blood serum in patients with revision hip arthroplasty and carbohydrate metabolism disorders. Nauka molodyh (Eruditio Juvenium). 2023;11(1):5–14. doi: 10.23888/HMJ20231115-14
  38. Woolhead GM, Donovan JL, Dieppe PA. Outcomes of total knee replacement: a qualitative study. Rheumatology. 2005;44(8):1032–7. doi: 10.1093/rheumatology/keh674
  39. Karateev DE, Makevnina AV, Luchikhina EL, Tangieva AR. Hardware physiotherapy in the treatment of rheumatic diseases. Voprosy kurortologii, fizioterapii i lechebnoj fizicheskoj kul'tury. 2021;98(2):31–38. doi: 10.17116/kurort20219802131

补充文件

附件文件
动作
1. JATS XML
2. Fig. 1. Flow chart of the study design (according to the recommendations of STrengthening the Reporting of OBservational studies in Epidemiology, STROBE). © Eco-Vector, 2025.

下载 (245KB)
3. Fig. 2. Percentage of NSAIDs used in the comparison and PEMF groups, demonstrating a statistically significant difference according to the chi-square criterion during the first and second postoperative months in favor of the PEMF group. *p <0.05. © Eco-Vector, 2025.

下载 (73KB)
4. Fig. 3. Oxford Knee Score during the study period, showing a higher clinical score during each follow-up in favor of the treatment group. *p <0.05. © Eco-Vector, 2025.

下载 (93KB)

版权所有 © Eco-Vector, 2024



СМИ зарегистрировано Федеральной службой по надзору в сфере связи, информационных технологий и массовых коммуникаций (Роскомнадзор).
Регистрационный номер и дата принятия решения о регистрации СМИ: серия ПИ № ФС 77 - 86508 от 11.12.2023
СМИ зарегистрировано Федеральной службой по надзору в сфере связи, информационных технологий и массовых коммуникаций (Роскомнадзор).
Регистрационный номер и дата принятия решения о регистрации СМИ: серия ЭЛ № ФС 77 - 80650 от 15.03.2021
г.