Cargando…
External devices increasing bone quality in animals: A systematic review
Background: Osteoporosis can reduce bone quality and increase the risk of fractures. In addition to pharmacological approaches, physical activity, and implanted devices, external devices can also be detected in the literature as a technique to strengthen bones. This type of intervention arises to be...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Elsevier
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10679491/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/38027551 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e22379 |
Sumario: | Background: Osteoporosis can reduce bone quality and increase the risk of fractures. In addition to pharmacological approaches, physical activity, and implanted devices, external devices can also be detected in the literature as a technique to strengthen bones. This type of intervention arises to be particularly promising because it minimizes the invasiveness of therapy. Methods: A systematic review of the technologies involved in such devices was carried out to identify the most fruitful ones in improving bone quality. This review, according to the PRISMA Statement, focuses on studies involving animals, and excludes pharmaceutical approaches. Findings: The animal models and devices used, their settings, interventions, outcomes measured, and consequent effect on bone quality are reported for each detected technology. Ultrasound and laser arose to be the most studied technologies in the literature, even if they have yet to be proved to have a significant effect on bone quality. Interpretation: External devices for bone quality improvement offer a non-invasive approach that causes minimum discomfort to the patient. This review aimed to detect which technologies reported in the literature significantly affect bone quality. The results showed that several technologies are currently used to improve bone quality. However, each study measures different outcomes and uses different measurement methods, device settings, and interventions. This lack of standardization and the reduced number of articles found do not allow for proper quantitative comparisons. |
---|