bio-frequency spectrum radiation & wound healing j. m. schramm, m.a., r. a. hardesty, m.d., k....
TRANSCRIPT
BIO-FREQUENCY SPECTRUM RADIATION & WOUND
HEALINGJ. M. Schramm, M.A., R. A. Hardesty,
M.D., K. C. Oberg, M.D., Ph.D.
PROBLEM & BACKGROUND
GOALS & OBJECTIVES
METHODS
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
CONCLUSIONS
BFS & WOUND HEALING
CLINICAL PROBLEM
Compromised wound healing (bed sores, DM, smokers)
Electromagnetic radiation in wound healing Microwave radiation in wound
healing Infrared radiation in wound healing
Bio-Frequency Spectrum (BFS) radiation
BACKGROUND: BFS & LIGHT SPECTRUM
Light frequency spectrum Microwave Infrared
BFS Microwave Infrared
BACKGROUND: BFS RADIATION TREATMENT
Reported results of BFS treatment for bed sores
Reported results from C. Kun, et. al., 1995.
GOALS & OBJECTIVES Controlled evaluation of wound
healing
MacFarlane flap tissue survival
Simple incision breaking strength
METHODS: EXPERIMENTAL TECHNIQUES
Anesthesia Nembutal 2 cc/kg
Flap design MacFarlane flap
Standardization 4x10 cm template Stapled incision
METHODS: EXPERIMENTAL TECHNIQUES
Anesthesia Nembutal 2 cc/kg
Incisional design Midline incision
Standardization 3 cm template Clipped incision
METHODS: TREATMENT PROTOCOL
Control group No treatment (Social cage 30 min. twice
daily)
METHODS: TREATMENT PROTOCOL
Treatment groups Infrared radiation
30 min. twice daily
BFS radiation 30 min. twice daily
RESULTS: DATA ANALYSIS
MacFarlane flap Planimetric analysis
Surface area survivability
RESULTS: DATA ANALYSIS
Simple incision Tensiometer analysis
Wound breaking strength
RESULTS: MACFARLANE FLAP
BFS treatment 22.0% (+/- 11.8%)
p<.01 vs. controls p=.16 vs. IR
IR treatment 30.3% (+/- 10.0%)
Controls 36.9% (+/- 9.6%)
MacFarland Flap Necrosis
Treatment Group
Perce
nt N
ecro
sisControl IR BFS
RESULTS: SIMPLE INCISION BFS treatment
2.62N/mm2(+/-0.44N/mm2)
p<.001 vs. controls p<.10 vs. IR
IR treatment 2.26N/mm2(+/-0.38N/mm2)
p<.03 vs. controls
Controls 1.73N/mm2(+/-0.47N/mm2)
Wound Breaking Strength
Treatment Groups
New
tons
per
mm
*2
Control IR BFS
DISCUSSION
BFS vs. Controls Less flap necrosis
p<.01 Greater wound breaking strength
p<.001
BFS vs. IR Trend towards less flap necrosis
p=.16 Greater wound breaking strength
p<.01
CONCLUSIONS
BFS as efficient as IR in wound healing Flap necrosis Simple incision tensile strength
BFS trends Appears to show greater wound healing
than IR Future research
Verify results Expand to other models