ArticleAnnals of medicine2023
The effect of shock waves on mineralization and regeneration of distraction zone in osteoporotic rabbits.
Article in Annals of medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- The Effect of Tricyclic Antidepressants on Fracture Healing: An Experimental Study.Current pharmaceutical design · 2026Article
- The effects of extracorporeal shockwave therapy on bone mineral density and microarchitecture in animal models of osteoporosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in rehabilitation sciences · 2025Review
- Ubiquitination and deubiquitination: Implications for the pathogenesis and treatment of osteoarthritis.Journal of orthopaedic translation · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveOsteoporotic individuals suffer from various complications such as spontaneous bone fractures due to decreased bone strength and failure in bone healing as a result of decreased bone mineral density and deterioration of bone microstructure. In this study, the effects of Extracorporeal Shock Wave Therapy (ESWT) in a distraction osteogenesis model in osteoporotic rabbits were investigated to prevent these failures and improve bone microstructure. MATERIAL AND
methodsA total of 28 female New Zealand rabbits underwent mandibular distraction osteogenesis and were divided into four groups: non-ovariectomized control (Cont), ovariectomized control (O-Cont), ovariectomized ESWT1 (O-ESWT1) and ovariectomized ESWT2 (O-ESWT2). ESWT was only applied to the ESWT2 group before the osteotomy, and to both the ESWT1 and ESWT2 groups after the osteotomy. Dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry was used to determine bone mineral density on both the 7th and 28th day of the consolidation. Stereological methods were used to identify new bone formation, connective tissue and neoangiogenesis volume.
resultsAccording to the dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry examination both at the 7th and 28th day of the consolidation, lower bone mineral density was seen in the ESWT groups. However, the stereological examination showed that shock wave therapy significantly increased new bone formation both ESWT1 and ESWT2 compared with O-Cont, significantly increased neoangiogenesis in O-ESWT1 compared with O-Cont.
conclusionsThe application of ESWT in these parameters after osteotomy was beneficial for bone regeneration in mandibular distraction in osteoporotics. However, ESWT has been shown to be ineffective in improving bone mineral density.KEY MESSAGESThe osteoporotic model can be successfully established in rabbits and the subjects can tolerate the distraction procedures.Stereology is a useful analysis method that can determine the volume of the new bone formation and neoangiogenesis.Extracorporeal shock wave therapy has biostimulatory effects on bone tissue.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.