Fractures in the Horse. Группа авторов
Читать онлайн книгу.
[94] and that the mechanism may be induction of bone microfracture [95]. However, there is no evidence that ESWT can enhance fracture healing in horses.
Vibration therapy has been introduced to the equine market. In humans and experimental animals, the tendency is for bone healing to be improved in individuals with osteoporosis [96]. Although it has been suggested for equine rehabilitation purposes (Chapter 15) [97], its use to stimulate bone healing is questionable.
Hyperbaric oxygen therapy has been advocated to stimulate bone healing, but systematic reviews of the therapy have been inconclusive [98]. Considering the cost and need to transport the animal, it is unlikely to be clinically viable.
Conclusions
Bone healing is a complex paradigm, and thorough understanding of the process is necessary in order to make sound clinical judgements when managing fracture cases. An understanding of the healing process is also necessary as new techniques and medications become available. In human medicine, the ‘diamond concept’ has been proposed as a means to follow fracture healing (Figure 6.4). This addresses all the various factors that influence fracture healing, including the osteogenic cell population, osteoinductive stimulants, osteoconductive matrix, mechanical stability, vascularity and host factors. These guidelines should all be considered when managing fractures in horses.
Figure 6.4 The diamond concept for fracture repair demonstrating the key elements involved in the complex organization of bone healing.
Source: Based on Giannoudis et al. [23].
References
1 1 Müller, M.E., Koch, P., Nazarian, S., and Schatzker, J. (1990). Principles of the classification of fractures. In: The Comprehensive Classification of Fractures of Long Bones (eds. M.E. Müller, U. Heim, S. Nazarian, et al.), 4–7. Berlin: Springer.
2 2 Marsell, R. and Einhorn, T.A. (2011). The biology of fracture healing. Injury 42: 551–555.
3 3 Shapiro, F. (1988). Cortical bone repair. The relationship of the lacunar–canalicular system and intercellular gap junctions to the repair process. J. Bone Joint Surg. Am. 70: 1067–1081.
4 4 Rahn, B.A. (2002). Bone healing: histologic and physiologic concepts. In: Bone in Clinical Orthopedics (ed. G.E. Fackelman), 287–326. Stuttgart, NY: Thieme.
5 5 Glatt, V., Evans, C.H., and Tetsworth, K. (2017). A concert between biology and biomechanics: the influence of the mechanical environment on bone healing. Front. Physiol. 7: 678.
6 6 Rupp, M., Biehl, C., Budak, M. et al. (2018). Diaphyseal long bone nonunions – types, aetiology, economics, and treatment recommendations. Int. Orthop. 42: 247–258.
7 7 Włodarski, K.H. (1990). Properties and origin of osteoblasts. Clin. Orthop. Relat. Res. 252: 276–293.
8 8 Shirley, D., Marsh, D., Jordan, G. et al. (2005). Systemic recruitment of osteoblastic cells in fracture healing. J. Orthop. Res. 23: 1013–1021.
9 9 Walters, G., Pountos, I., and Giannoudis, P.V. (2018). The cytokines and micro‐environment of fracture haematoma: current evidence. J. Tissue Eng. Regen. Med. 12: e1662–e 1677.
10 10 Sathyendra, V. and Darowish, M. (2013). Basic science of bone healing. Hand Clin. 29: 473–481.
11 11 Aro, H.T. and Chao, E.Y. (1993). Bone‐healing patterns affected by loading, fracture fragment stability, fracture type, and fracture site compression. Clin. Orthop. Relat. Res. 293: 8–17.
12 12 Kwong, F.N.K. and Harris, M.B. (2008). Recent developments in the biology of fracture repair. J. Am. Acad. Orthop. Surg. 16: 619–625.
13 13 Stewart, H.L. and Kawcak, C.E. (2018). The importance of subchondral bone in the pathophysiology of osteoarthritis. Front. Vet. Sci. 5: 178.
14 14 Smith, M.R., Kawcak, C.E., and McIlwraith, C.W. (2016). Science in brief: report on the Havemeyer foundation workshop on subchondral bone problems in the equine athlete. Equine Vet. J. 48: 6–8.
15 15 Loi, F., Córdova, L.A., Pajarinen, J. et al. (2016). Inflammation, fracture and bone repair. Bone 86: 119–130.
16 16 Lopez, M.J. and Markel, M.D. (2012). Bone biology and fracture healing. In: Equine Surgery, 4e (eds. J.A. Auer and J.A. Stick), 1025–1040. St Louis, Missouri: Elsevier.
17 17 Gerstenfeld, L.C., Cullinane, D.M., Barnes, G.L. et al. (2003). Fracture healing as a post‐natal developmental process: molecular, spatial, and temporal aspects of its regulation. J. Cell. Biochem. 88: 873–884.
18 18 Claes, L., Eckert‐Hübner, K., and Augat, P. (2002). The effect of mechanical stability on local vasularization and tissue differentiation in callus healing. J. Orthop. Res. 20: 1099–1105.
19 19 Miron, R.J. and Bosshardt, D.D. (2016). OsteoMacs: key players around bone biomaterials. Biomaterials 82: 1–19.
20 20 Ono, T. and Takayanagi, H. (2017). Osteoimmunology in bone fracture healing. Curr. Osteoporos. Rep. 15: 367–375.
21 21 Mountziaris, P.M., Spicer, P.P., Kasper, F.K., and Mikos, A.G. (2011). Harnessing and modulating inflammation in strategies for bone regeneration. Tissue Eng. Part B Rev. 17: 393–402.
22 22 Takayanagi, H. (2005). Inflammatory bone destruction and osteoimmunology. J. Periodontal Res. 40: 287–293.
23 23 Giannoudis, P.V., Hak, D., Sanders, D. et al. (2015). Inflammation, bone healing, and anti‐inflammatory drugs. J. Orthop. Trauma 29: 6–9.
24 24 Kular, J., Tickner, J., Chim, S.M., and Xu, J. (2012). An overview of the regulation of bone remodelling at the cellular level. Clin. Biochem. 45: 863–873.
25 25 Pountos, I., Panteli, M., Panagiotopoulos, E. et al. (2014). Can we enhance fracture vascularity: what is the evidence? Injury 45: 49–57.
26 26 Ciampolini, J. and Harding, K.G. (2000). Pathophysiology of chronic bacterial osteomyelitis. Why do antibiotics fail so often? Postgrad. Med. J. 76: 479–483.
27 27 Roux, W. (1881). The struggle of the parts in the organism; A contribution to the completion of the mechanical expediency teaching. Leipzig, Germany: Engelmann; urn: nbn: de: kobv: b4–200905195064.
28 28 Wolff, J. (1892). The Law of Transformation of Bones. Verlag von August Hirschwald: Berlin, Germany.
29 29 Pauwels, F. (1960). Eine neue Theorie über den Einflußmechanischer Reize auf die Differenzierung der Stützgewebe. Z. Anat. Entwicklungsgesch. 121: 478–515.
30 30 Glowacki, J. (1998). Angiogenesis in fracture repair. Clin. Orthop. Relat. Res. 355: 82–89.
31 31 Claes, L.E. and Heigele, C.A. (1999). Magnitudes of local stress and strain along bony surfaces predict the course and type of fracture healing. J. Biomech. 32: 255–266.
32 32 Chao, E.Y., Aro, H.T., Lewallen, D.G., and Kelly, P.J. (1989). The effect of rigidity on fracture healing in external fixation. Clin. Orthop. Relat. Res. 241: 24–35.
33 33 Acklin, Y.P., Bircher, A., Morgenstern, M. et al. (2018). Benefits of hardware removal after plating. Injury 49: 91–95.
34 34 Alves, C.J., Neto, E., Sousa, D.M. et al. (2016). Fracture pain – traveling unknown pathways. Bone 85: 107–114.
35 35 Schütze, R., Rees, C., Smith, A. et al. (2018). How can we best reduce pain catastrophizing in adults with chronic noncancer pain? A systematic review and meta‐analysis. J. Pain 19: 233–256.
36 36