Skip to main content
NCBI home page
NIHPA Author Manuscripts logoLink to NIHPA Author Manuscripts
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2023 Jul 1.
Published in final edited form as: J Orthop Res. 2021 Oct 17;40(7):1593–1603. doi: 10.1002/jor.25185

Pulsed Electromagnetic Field Therapy Alters Early Healing in a Rat Model of Rotator Cuff Injury and Repair: Potential Mechanisms

Julianne Huegel 1, Peter YW Chan 1, Stephanie N Weiss 1, Courtney A Nuss 1, Harina Raja 1, Erik I Waldorff 3, Nianli Zhang 3, James T Ryaby 3, Louis J Soslowsky 1,2, Andrew F Kuntz 1,2
PMCID: PMC9013393  NIHMSID: NIHMS1747394  PMID: 34657312

Abstract

Rotator cuff repair failure remains common due to poor tendon healing, particularly at the enthesis. We previously showed that pulsed electromagnetic field (PEMF) therapy improved the mechanical properties of the rat supraspinatus tendon post-operatively. However, little is known about the mechanisms behind PEMF-dependent contributions to improved healing in this injury model. The objective of this study was to determine the influence of PEMF treatment on tendon gene expression and cell composition, as well as bone microarchitecture and dynamic bone metabolism during early stages of healing. We hypothesized that PEMF treatment would amplify tendon-healing related signaling pathways while mitigating inflammation and improve bone metabolism at the repair site. Rats underwent rotator cuff injury and repair followed by assignment to either control (non-PEMF) or PEMF treatment groups. Gene and protein expression as well as tendon and bone histological assessments were performed 3, 7, 14, 21, and 28 days after injury. Gene expression data demonstrated an upregulation in the BMP2 signaling pathway and increases in pro-osteogenic genes at the insertion, supporting important processes to re-establish the tendon-bone interface. PEMF also downregulated genes related to a fibrotic healing response. Anti-inflammatory effects were demonstrated by both gene expression and macrophage phenotype. PEMF significantly increased the rate of kinetic bone formation directly adjacent to the tendon enthesis as well as the number of cuboidal surface osteoblasts (active osteoblasts) in the humeral head. This study has provided insight into how PEMF affects cellular and molecular processes in the supraspinatus tendon and adjacent bone after injury and repair.

Keywords: rotator cuff repair, animal model, therapeutics, pulsed electromagnetic field, inflammation

INTRODUCTION

Rotator cuff tears affect millions of individuals each year.1,2 Due to associated pain and loss of function, these injuries often require surgical intervention.1,2 Surgical and rehabilitation protocol refinement has improved post-operative results, yet repair failure remains common due to poor healing of the tendon, particularly at the enthesis.2 Therefore, several therapeutics have been utilized in conjunction with surgical repair to improve outcomes. Non-invasive, adjunctive techniques are of interest as they do not interfere with surgical, immobilization, or physical therapy protocols.

Pulsed electromagnetic field (PEMF) therapy has been shown to enhance orthopedic healing processes and is approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to treat fracture non-union and augment spine fusion surgery.6,7In two studies utilizing the rat model of rotator cuff and repair, PEMF improved mechanical properties of the rat supraspinatus tendon post-operatively.8,9 Although these improvements were consistent over a range of treatment durations and electromagnetic frequencies, one hour of PhysioStim® PEMF (Orthofix Medical, Inc.) led to over 100% increases in both tendon stiffness and modulus compared to non-PEMF controls at 4 weeks post-injury and repair.8,9 While PEMF-treated tendon properties were still much lower than native, uninjured values8, these clear improvements in mechanical strength could reduce the incidence of early repair failure.10 Increased bone volume fraction, trabecular thickness, and bone mineral density were also noted at the enthesis in the proximal humerus with PEMF treatment, supporting the role of PEMF in bone formation activation.8 Repaired supraspinatus tendons treated with PEMF demonstrated increased expression of Type I collagen and fibronectin and improved collagen organization.9 Interestingly, these positive effects were not observed with PEMF administration following midsubstance repair of the rat Achilles tendon.11 Together, these findings suggest that PEMF treatment alters the native biological healing response at the supraspinatus enthesis following injury and tendon-to-bone repair.

However, these alterations in composition and tissue structure could be downstream of many physiological responses to PEMF, including changes in signaling pathways and inflammation that regulate cell metabolism, production of matrix components, and matrix turnover. A number of key signaling pathways have been identified as part of the native tendon healing response. Transforming growth factor β (TGFβ) signaling plays a major role in driving neonatal tendon regeneration and is involved in recruitment of cells to the injury site.12 Several members of the TGFβ superfamily are known players in robust tendon healing, including bone morphogenetic protein (BMP) 2 enhancement of bone-tendon integration and BMP4 and 7 regulation of tenocyte differentiation.13,14 The mTOR signaling pathway also regulates collagen fibril formation and alignment15, which are crucial for reestablishing force transmission between muscle and bone. This pathway also stimulates tenocyte differentiation and has been shown to be involved in exosome-mediated tendon regeneration16,17. The Wnt/β-catenin signaling pathway regulates anabolic bone formation; localized activation has successfully enhanced rotator cuff healing in a previous animal study.18 Further, inflammation during tendon healing follows a temporal pattern and must be specifically modulated; early inflammation is necessary for healing but chronic inflammation diminishes tendon properties. Therefore, the establishment of a short inflammatory period is important but it must culminate to allow later stages of cell proliferation and tissue remodeling.19,20

Interestingly, all of the pathways mentioned are known to be altered with PEMF exposure. Rat osteoblasts treated with PEMF responded similarly to cells treated with BMP221, and mTOR signaling was activated in mouse fibroblasts exposed to PEMF.22 These and a number of other studies support the concept that many cell types respond to PEMF exposure analogously to soluble growth factor exposure. Further, a series of human cell culture experiments demonstrated PEMF mediation of inflammatory cytokine expression,23 and PEMF treatment has been associated with pain relief in clinical studies following surgical procedures.24,25

Although our previous studies indicate a positive effect of PEMF on both soft tissue and bony properties during tendon-to-bone healing, little is known about the possible contributions of PEMF to biologically improved healing in this model. We speculated that early cell-level changes could result in the significant improvements in tissue mechanics seen at 4 and 8 weeks post-injury in our previous studies.8,9 Therefore, the objective of this study was to determine the influence of PEMF treatment on tendon gene expression and cell composition, as well as bone microarchitecture and metabolism during early stages of healing. We hypothesized that PEMF treatment would amplify tendon-healing related signaling pathways while mitigating inflammation, as well as improve bone metabolism at the site of repair.

Methods

Study Design & Surgical Procedures

All animal procedures were approved by the University of Pennsylvania Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee (#805274). A total of 106 adult male Sprague-Dawley rats (400–450g, approximately 4–5 months of age) were used. This age replicates previous rotator cuff studies and is associated with slow or no skeletal growth. Animals were housed with 12-hour light/dark cycles and received standard rat chow ad libitum. All animals underwent bilateral supraspinatus injury and repair, as previously described8,9,26–28, followed by systemic exposure to PhysioStim® PEMF (Orthofix Medical, Inc.) for 1 hour daily (PEMF, n=53) starting post-operative day 1 and continuing until euthanasia. Control animals did not receive PEMF therapy (non-PEMF, n=53). All animals received a three-day regimen of buprenorphine post-op. Animals were euthanized via carbon dioxide at 3, 7, 14, 21, and 28 days post-injury and repair. These time points were chosen to cover stages of healing including inflammation, proliferation, and early remodeling. Additionally, previous studies identified alterations in protein expression and tendon mechanical properties as early as 4 weeks post-surgery.8,9,20 All animals were used for at least two assays (two shoulders from a single animal were never assigned to the same assay). Animals were randomly assigned within treatment groups for either 1) tendon gene expression, tendon protein expression, and μCT analyses OR 2) tendon (paraffin embedded) and bone (plastic embedded) histology.

PEMF Exposure

Animals receiving PEMF were exposed systemically using the commercial PEMF signal PhysioStim® (Orthofix Medical, Inc.); this signal has a maximum amplitude of 1.10 mT and a fundamental frequency of 3.85 kHz. This signal and treatment duration (1 hour per day) were chosen based on positive results from our previous studies.9 The day after surgery, animal cages were placed on custom-built PEMF racks (Orthofix Medical, Inc.), which include an electromagnetic coil for each module. A uniform electromagnetic field was produced across the module volume, sized to hold a standard rat cage.

Gene Expression

At the time of euthanasia, right supraspinatus tendons (n=5/group/time point) were dissected and detached from the humerus at the insertion. The supraspinatus muscle was removed. The tendon was cut into two parts, with the proximal 2 mm designated as the insertion, and remaining tendon designated as the midsubstance, including the myotendinous portion. Humerii from these limbs were wrapped in phosphate buffered saline (PBS) soaked gauze and stored at −20°C for μCT analysis (see below). Tendon samples were frozen in liquid nitrogen and stored at −80°C. RNA was isolated using a TRIspin method. Briefly, specimens were thawed in TRIzol (Life Technologies Inc.) and then physically chopped using micro-scissors followed by pipette pestling for approximately 5–10 minutes or until the tissue was integrated. Following phase separation, the aqueous phase was processed via fractionation on RNA Clean & Concentrator™-5 columns (Zymo Research). RNA concentrations were measured using a NanoDrop (ThermoScientific) and quality was checked via Bioanalyzer System (Agilent). RIN values of RNA used in this study were all over 7. The Penn Molecular Profiling Core performed specific target amplification followed by qPCR for target genes (Supplemental Table 1) using the Fluidigm BioMark HD Platform. Housekeeping genes were GAPDH and Ppib, both of which were stably expressed between groups at each time point. Samples with CT value outliers of reference genes were removed from analysis. ΔΔCT values were calculated at each time point to determine fold change between gene of interest and housekeeping gene, and then fold change between non-PEMF controls and PEMF-treated samples. ΔΔCT outliers were also removed (2.2x interquartile range method).29,30 After outlier removal, the minimum n for each group/time point was 3. ΔΔCT values were used to calculate fold change differences between controls and PEMF-treated samples at each time point (2−ΔΔCT), allowing the determination of time-specific effects of PEMF.

Protein Expression

At the time of euthanasia, left supraspinatus tendons (n=5/group/time point) were dissected in an identical fashion as the right tendons used for gene expression. Wet weights of each sample were recorded. Tendons were frozen in liquid nitrogen and stored at −80°C. Samples were chopped with micro-dissection scissors in RIPA buffer, followed by homogenization using a 3 mm Polytron Generator probe (VWR) for 10× 15 second pulses. Samples were incubated on ice followed by centrifugation. Protein quantity was measured using a BCA assay (ThermoFisher). Supernatant was stored at −80°C. Based on gene expression findings, Milliplex Multi-plex Assays (Millipore) were chosen to measure target protein concentrations (Rat TGFβ 3-Plex, Rat Vascular Injury Panel, and Rat Cytokine/Chemokine Semi-Custom Panel).31 The Penn Human Immunology Core performed these assays using the Luminex flow-cytometry based platform, according to manufacturer’s instructions. 50 ug of total protein was analyzed using each of the magnetic bead assays to measure the abundance of each protein included in the panel, allowing for the concentration of up to 15 analytes to be measured in a single sample. Mean fluorescence intensity values of analytes were measured in a MAGPIX system (Luminex). Total concentration of target protein in each sample is reported as ng/ml based on standard curve values.

Tendon & Enthesis Histology

Animals assigned for histology were injected with 5-ethynyl-2’-deoxyuridine (EdU, 3mg/kg) 24 hours prior to euthanasia. At the time of euthanasia, right humeral-tendon-muscle complexes (n=5/group/time point except for the 28 day time point, at which n=8/group) were dissected out and processed with paraffin. Samples were bisected in the coronal plane and 7 μm sections were collected from the tendon center. H&E: Sections were stained with hematoxylin and eosin. Slides were scanned using a Zeiss Axio Scan.Z1 and regions of interest (ROI) were imaged at 200x magnification. Cell shape and cellularity at both the tendon insertion and midsubstance were semi-quantitatively evaluated by three blinded graders using a custom grading scale as previously described (split by regions of interest but evaluated against samples from all time points).9,27,32 SafO: Adjacent sections were stained with Safranin O and Fast Green to identify changes in matrix composition. Enthesis fibrocartilage was imaged at 200x magnification, encompassing rounded fibrocartilage cells at the tendon-bone interface. Adjacent regions of the proximal tendon proper were also imaged. Safranin O-positive staining areas were quantified using ImageJ (NIH, v1.52). ROI were color thresholded for Safranin-positive red staining and quantified as a percentage of the ROI. No more than 1 sample per group was excluded for poor quality tissue at the enthesis. EdU: Immunohistochemical staining was performed to assess cell proliferation. Sections were permeabilized and stained with the Click & Go Reaction Buffer Kit (Click Chemistry #1263) with AlexaFluor647 Azide and coverslipped with DAPI mountant. Slides were imaged with DAPI & Cy5 filters using an AxioZoom fluorescent microscope (Zeiss). ROI in the tendon insertion and midsubstance were imaged at 100x magnification. Cy5+ cells were counted using ImageJ. On average 1–2 samples per group had poor quality staining (high background, etc) and were excluded from quantification. Macrophage Immunohistochemistry: Sections from 14 and 28-day time points were immunohistochemically stained for CD68 and CD163 (M1 and M2 macrophages, respectively33). Heat-induced antigen retrieval was performed with sodium citrate buffer, followed by primary antibody incubation (anti-CD68 Abcam ab31630 1:300; anti-CD163 Abcam ab182422 1:400) overnight at 4°C. Biotinylated secondary antibody was detected using diaminobenzidine. ROI at the tendon insertion and midsubstance were imaged at 200x magnification and % positive pixels were quantified using a custom MATLAB code. For all histological measurements, at least two ROI were chosen from two to three slides selected from comparable depths through the tendons. On average 1–2 samples per group had poor quality staining (high background, etc) and were excluded from quantification.

μCT Scans

Humerii dissected for tendon gene expression (described above) (n=5/group/time point) were μCT scanned (VivaCT80, Scanco) at 10.5μm resolution (70 kVP energy, 400ms integration time). Specifically, the trabecular bone contained between the articular surface and the proximal humeral growth plate within the greater tuberosity was analyzed by manually segmenting sequential coronal plane slices to specify analysis to trabecular bone excluding surrounding cortical bone and humeral growth plate, as well as establishing the region within the greater tuberosity using the anatomical neck as a landmark. Global thresholding was applied to all images, and standard parameters of trabecular microarchitecture were measured.

Bone Histomorphometry

Animals assigned for histology for the 21 and 28-day time points (n=5/group at 21 days, n=8/group at 28 days) were injected with calcein (Sigma, 10 mg/kg) 7 and 14 days prior to euthanasia. At the time of euthanasia, left humeral heads were harvested and cleaned of soft tissues. The medullary cavity was opened and the majority of the diaphysis was removed. Samples were fixed and dehydrated in ethanol, followed by processing into methyl methacrylate (MMA), embedding in PMMA, and coronal sectioning at 5 μm onto gelatin-coated slides. Derived kinetic indices: Slides were coverslipped with DAPI mountant and fluorescently imaged with FITC (for calcein) and DAPI filters. ROI were chosen at 200x magnification in the epiphysis. Derived kinetic indices were calculated by measuring lengths of bone surface area and distance between calcein labels (total bone surface, BS; calcein-positive mineralizing surface, MS; interlabel distance, Ir.L.Th) using ImageJ (NIH). These parameters were used to calculate percent mineralizing surface, mineral apposition rate (MAR), and bone formation rate (BFR). On average 1–2 samples per group had poor quality staining (high background, etc) and were excluded from quantification. Osteoblast/Osteoclast counts: Slides were stained with Goldner’s Trichrome for bone cell analysis. ROI were imaged at 500x magnification in the epiphysis. Surface osteoblasts and osteoclasts were counted manually. Cell identification was based on descriptions/examples from literature of location and morphology. All measurements were made using 2–3 slides per sample and 3–5 ROI chosen from each slide; measurements were averaged for each sample. On average 1–2 samples per group had poor quality staining (high background, etc) and were excluded from quantification. All counts and measurements were by three blinded reviewers.

Statistics

Statistical comparisons were made using GraphPad Prism 7 (GraphPad Software, San Diego, CA). Comparisons were made between PEMF and non-PEMF groups over time using two-way ANOVAs with Bonferroni post-hoc tests for pairwise comparisons. Gene expression data was log transformed prior to statistical analysis. Due to the large number of comparisons, false discovery for gene expression data is possible; for unbiased presentation, all comparisons (ANOVA and pairwise) with p<0.05 are disclosed. Semiquantitative histological assessments (cell shape and cell density) were compared with non-parametric two-way ANOVA (Kruskal Wallis). No statistical comparisons were made between tissue types (insertion vs. mid-substance). Significance was set at p<0.05. Significant ANOVAs are reported as p-values in the results and in figure legends, with specification for time or treatment variable. Data is presented as mean ± standard deviation or median ± interquartile range as specified in figure legend.

Results

Gene expression

At the tendon insertion, PEMF treatment significantly altered a number of genes related to BMP signaling across time points. Compared to non-PEMF controls, tendons exposed to PEMF demonstrated increased BMP target Alp1 (Fig. 1A, p=0.04), increased downstream target Bglap (Fig. 1B, p=0.007), increased the Bmp2 signaling molecule (Fig. 1C, p=0.0003), and increased downstream target Col1a1 (Fig. 1D, p=0.03). Additionally, many genes related to the TGFβ signaling pathway were modulated by PEMF exposure. PEMF increased downstream growth factor Ctgf early and decreased Ctgf late (Fig. 1E, p=0.02), increased upstream regulator Fn1 (Fig. 1F, p=0.05), decreased downstream (downregulated) target Mmp13 (Fig. 1G, p=0.006), decreased signaling molecule Tgfb3 (Fig. 1H, p=0.009), and decreased downstream cartilage marker Sox9 (Fig. 1I, p=0.008). Interestingly, PEMF also impacted several genes associated with inflammation, increasing anti-inflammatory cytokine Il10 (Fig. 2A, p=0.0005), decreasing pro-inflammatory cytokine Il1b at 28 days post-injury (Fig. 2B), and altering Ptgs2 (Fig. 2C) and Tnf expression (Fig. 2D). There were no significant differences identified in the expression of other target genes at the tendon insertion (Fig. S1 and S2).

Figure 1. BMP & TGFβ Signaling Related Gene Expression in the Tendon Insertion.

Figure 1.

Open in a new tab

At the tendon insertion, PEMF treatment (A) increased Alp1 (p=0.04), (B) increased Bglap (p=0.007), (C) increased Bmp2 (p=0.0003), (D) increased Col1a1 (p=0.03), (E) increased Ctgf early and decreased Ctgf late (p=0.02), (F) increased Fn1 (p=0.05), (G) decreased Mmp13 (p=0.006), (H) decreased Tgfb3 (p=0.009), and (I) decreased Sox9 (p=0.008). P-values are listed for significant differences based on the individual variable of treatment as measured by two-way ANOVA. Black bars indicate post-hoc significance (p<0.05). Data shown as individual data points and mean±SD; values were normalized to housekeeping genes and then normalized to non-PEMF at each time point (n=5/group/time point).

Figure 2. Inflammation Related Gene Expression in the Tendon Insertion.

Figure 2.

Open in a new tab

At the tendon insertion, PEMF treatment (A) increased Il10 (p=0.0005), (B) decreased Il1b at 28 days post-injury, (C) altered Ptgs2 expression, and (D) decreased Tnf expression at 14 days and increased Tnf expression at 28 days post-injury. P-values are listed for significant differences based on the individual variable of treatment as measured by two-way ANOVA. Black bars indicate post-hoc significance (p<0.05). Data shown as individual data points and mean±SD; values were normalized to housekeeping genes and then normalized to non-PEMF at each time point (n=5/group/time point).

At the tendon midsubstance, PEMF treatment had similar significant effects on a number of genes related to the TGFβ signaling pathway. PEMF increased downstream targets Ctgf (Fig. S3A, p=0.002), Gdf5 (Fig. S3B, p=0.006), Mmp13 (Fig. S3C, p=0.005), Postn (Fig. S3D, p=0.01), Scx at 7 days post-injury (Fig. S3E), and Tnc (Fig. S3F, p=0.009). Select genes involved in inflammatory processes were also altered with PEMF at the tendon midsubstance, including increased Ptgs2 (Fig. S3G, p=0.04), increased Tac1 (Fig. S3H, p=0.001), and decreased Tnf (Fig. S3I, p=0.04). Genes related to the mTOR signaling pathway were also uniquely altered in the midsubstance, with PEMF exposure leading to increased expression of downstream matrix protein Fn1 at mid- to late time points (Fig. S4A, p=0.002), decreased expression of regulatory protein Rptor across time points (Fig. S4B, p=0.05), and decreased downstream transcription factor Srebf1 expression at early time points (Fig. S4C, p=0.0009). There were no significant differences identified in the expression of other target genes at the tendon midsubstance, with the exception of Wnt receptor Lrp5 (Fig. S5 and S6).

Protein Expression

At the tendon insertion, protein expression was not significantly altered by PEMF treatment across all time points for any target measured. Although the expression of TGFβ1 was consistent across time points (Fig. S7A), there were time dependent changes in the expression of TGFβ2 and TGFβ3 signaling molecules (Fig. S7B,C, p<0.0001 for both). At 3 days post-injury, MCP-1 (monocyte chemoattractant protein 1) was decreased in PEMF-treated tendons (Fig. S7D, p=0.04). The expression of VEGF and TIMP-1 were also time dependent (Fig. S7E, F, p<0.0001 for both). Anti-inflammatory cytokine IL-10 was increased in PEMF-treated tendons at 21 days post-injury (Fig. S7G, p=0.003), but PEMF did not have any effect on IL-1β or IL-17A (Fig. S7H,I).

Similar to the insertion, the expression of TGFβ1 was consistent in the midsubstance across time points (Fig. S8A) and there were time dependent changes in the expression of TGFβ2 and TGFβ3 signaling molecules (Fig. S8B,C, p<0.0001 for both). MCP-1 levels dropped below detectable levels for non-PEMF controls at day 14 and beyond but were consistently detectable in PEMF samples across all time points (Fig. S8D). Expression of VEGF was time dependent (Fig. S8E, p=0.0002). TIMP-1, an MMP inhibitor, was decreased in PEMF treated tendons at 7 days post-injury (Fig. S8F, p=0.01). No measured cytokine was altered by PEMF exposure (Fig. S8G,H,I).

There were no differences in the expression of caveolin-1 at the insertion or midsubstance, or in the expression of CTGF at the insertion (Fig. S7J,K; Fig. S8J). Several proteins were not expressed above detectable level (CTGF in the midsubstance, IL-6 in both regions, IL-4 in both regions); Pai-1 data was unreliable due to low bead counts.

Histology of Tendon & Enthesis Fibrocartilage

There were no differences in cell density or cell shape in either the tendon insertion or midsubstance with PEMF treatment compared to non-PEMF controls (Fig. S9). Cell shape and cellularity changed dependent of time in the midsubstance for both groups (cellularity, p=0.001; cell shape, p<0.0001); these metrics did not significantly change in the insertion. Positive EdU staining was also not different between control and PEMF-treated groups, but cell proliferation was highly time-dependent, diminishing across time for both regions of interest (Fig. S10A,B, p<0.0001). Representative images from post-injury day 7 are shown in Figure S10C.

Quantification of positive immunohistochemical staining at the tendon insertion demonstrated CD68+ macrophages were unaltered by PEMF (Fig. 3A), while CD163+ macrophages were significantly increased by PEMF across time (p=0.01, Fig. 3B). The ratio of M1 to M2 macrophages at the insertion was also decreased with PEMF (p=0.03, Fig. 3C). In the tendon midsubstance, PEMF decreased CD68+ cells (p=0.02, Fig. 3D) and increased CD163+ macrophages (p=0.01, Fig. 3E), leading to a significantly decreased ratio of M1 to M2 macrophages across time (p=0.02, Fig. 3F). Representative images from post-injury days 14 and 28 are shown in Figure S11.

Figure 3. Macrophages.

Figure 3.

Open in a new tab

Quantification of positive immunohistochemical staining demonstrates that at the tendon insertion, (A) CD68+ macrophages were unaltered by PEMF while (B) CD163+ macrophages were significantly increased across time (p=0.01). (C) The ratio of M1 to M2 macrophages at the insertion was also decreased with PEMF (p=0.03). In the tendon midsubstance, (D) CD68+ cells were decreased with PEMF (p=0.02) and (E) CD163+ macrophages were increased (p=0.01), leading to (F) a significantly decreased ratio of M1 to M2 macrophages (p=0.02). P-values are listed for significant differences based on the individual variable of treatment as measured by two-way ANOVA. Black bars indicate post-hoc significance (p<0.05). Data shown as individual data points and mean±SD (n=5–8/group/time point).

There were no differences in the quantity of positive Safranin O (proteoglycan content) staining of the enthesis fibrocartilage between treatment groups (Fig. S12); this metric did demonstrate a significant variability within groups.

MicroCT

Bone properties of the greater tuberosity of the humerus measured by μCT were largely unaffected by PEMF exposure. No differences were seen in bone mineral content (Fig. S13A), bone mineral density (Fig. S13B), connectivity density (Fig. S13C), bone volume/total volume (BV/TV) (Fig. S13D), trabecular thickness (Fig. S13E), or trabecular number (not shown). Trabecular separation was increased by PEMF (p=0.05, Fig. S13F).

Bone Histomorphometry

Double calcein labeling of the humeral tuberosity was quantified to compare dynamic bone metabolism. The ratio of mineralizing surface to bone surface (MS/BS) was not affected by PEMF exposure (Fig. 4A), nor was mineral apposition rate (MAR, distance between labels per day) (Fig. 4B). PEMF exposure significantly increased bone formation rate per bone surface (BFR/BS) across time points (Fig. 4C, p=0.04). Representative calcein double-labeling images of humeral tuberosity trabecular bone surfaces at 21 and 28 days post-injury for both groups are shown in Figure 4D.

Figure 4. Dynamic Bone Metabolism.

Figure 4.

Open in a new tab

Double calcein labeling of the humeral tuberosity was quantified to compare (A) the ratio of mineralizing surface to bone surface (MS/BS), (B) mineral apposition rate (MAR), and (C) bone formation rate per bone surface (BFR/BS). PEMF significantly increased bone formation rate per bone surface (p=0.04). Data shown as individual data points and mean±SD (n=5–7/group/time point). (D) Representative calcein double-labeling images of humeral tuberosity trabecular bone surfaces (200x magnification) at 21 and 28 days post-injury for both control and PEMF-treated animals. Scale bar represents 400 μm.

Calcified sections of humeral tuberosity stained with Goldner’s Trichrome allowed for measurement of the number of osteoblasts (Ob.N/BS) and the number of osteoclasts (Oc.N/BS). The number of osteoblasts on mineralizing bone surface was significantly increased with PEMF treatment at 28 days post-injury (Fig. 5A). Osteoclast number was not affected by treatment across time points (Fig. 5B). Representative images of the humeral tuberosity at 28 days post-injury for both groups are shown in Figure 5C.

Figure 5. Static Bone Metabolism.

Figure 5.

Open in a new tab

Calcified sections of humeral tuberosity stained with Goldner’s Trichrome allowed for measurement of (A) the number of osteoblasts (Ob.N/BS) and (B) the number of osteoclasts (Oc.N/BS). Osteoblasts were significantly increased with PEMF treatment at 28 days post-injury. Black bars indicate post-hoc significance (p<0.05). Data shown as individual data points and mean±SD (n=5/group/time point). (C) Representative Goldner’s Trichrome stained images (500x) in the humeral tuberosity at 28 days post-injury for control (top) and PEMF (bottom) treated animals. Yellow arrowheads indicate osteoblasts on the trabecular surface (active). Yellow asterisks indicate osteoclasts on the trabecular surface. Scale bars represent 50 μm.

Discussion

Although previous studies support the use of PEMF to enhance tendon-to-bone repair, biological processes and molecular mechanisms associated with improved repair strength remained unclear. To optimize therapeutic interventions, identifying molecular pathways related to enhanced tendon healing is critical. This study demonstrated specific molecular and cellular changes within repaired supraspinatus tendons following PEMF treatment compared to controls.

First, gene expression data suggests upregulation in members of the BMP2 signaling pathway, including BMP2 ligand and connective tissue growth factor (CTGF). Increases in signaling may stimulate increased collagen and fibronectin expression seen in the tendon insertion throughout early healing. PEMF similarly induces expression of procollagen and other BMP2 targets in rat osteoblast cultures.21,32,33 Previous immunohistochemistry supports increased quantities of collagen and fibronectin proteins in PEMF-treated tendons at 4 weeks9; both are important components of the healing response and re-establish tendon tissue structure after injury.36 Interestingly, expression of both TGFβ3 ligand and MMP13 were decreased; these proteins are involved in a mechanically inferior fibrotic healing response.37 These results support a downregulation in the fibrotic response with PEMF, which corresponds with decreased tendon cross-sectional area after 4 weeks of treatment shown in previous studies.8,9 Taken together, gene expression data supports the hypothesis that PEMF treatment amplifies transcriptional activation of important molecular pathways, such as TGFβ signaling, involved in tendon healing.

We also hypothesized that PEMF would mitigate inflammation. Several studies have detailed the anti-inflammatory effect of PEMF on other musculoskeletal tissues including intervertebral disc.38,39 Indeed, PEMF had an anti-inflammatory effect in our model, upregulating expression of the anti-inflammatory cytokine Il10 in both the tendon insertion (confirmed at the protein level) and midsubstance, and downregulating pro-inflammatory cytokines Il1β and Tnfα. However, Ptgs2, which encodes pro-inflammatory cyclooxygenase-2 (COX2), was upregulated in both tendon regions at day 14 post-injury but downregulated at day 21. During tendon healing, the presence of an inflammatory response is crucial for initiating a healing response; however, chronic inflammation can impede ideal tissue structure reorganization.20 PEMF may play a role in balancing helpful early inflammation and detrimental late inflammation. Several studies have associated the presence of pro-inflammatory M1 macrophages with ECM degradation and other markers of the inflammatory response. Shifts toward an M1 phenotype correlate with poor healing. M2 macrophages play a contrasting role in promoting matrix deposition and restoration of normal tissue.40 Recruitment of M2 macrophages enhanced tendon microarchitecture recovery in ovine tendon lesions.41 Immunohistochemical staining demonstrated that at both the supraspinatus insertion and midsubstance, the ratio of M1 (CD68+) to M2 (CD163+) macrophages was significantly decreased across time points, suggesting a shift toward the anti-inflammatory M2 macrophage phenotype with PEMF. PEMF induced a similar shift in macrophage phenotype in cultured human tendon cells.42 Taken together, gene expression and immune cell marker localization may suggest a reduction in inflammation with PEMF treatment.

Our last hypothesis was driven by the primary clinical use of PEMF, fracture healing and spinal fusion,43,44 as well as our previous studies demonstrating improved bone microarchitecture in the rat rotator cuff model after 16 weeks of PEMF treatment.8 Additionally, the lack of improved healing in Achilles tendon midsubstance injury models suggests that PEMF plays a specific role in tendon-to-bone healing rather than tendon-to-tendon healing.11 These models differ in many ways including tendon injury location, surgical repair procedures, loading mechanics, and vascularity, all of which may impact PEMF efficacy. Specifically, we proposed that PEMF treatment in our model would increase early bone metabolism at the repair site. PEMF increased the expression of several pro-osteogenic genes at the insertion, including Alp1 (alkaline phosphatase), Bglap (osteocalcin), and Col1a. This suggests that PEMF could support important processes to re-establish the tendon-bone interface. PEMF also significantly increased the rate of kinetic bone formation adjacent to the tendon enthesis as well as the number of active osteoblasts in the humeral head. While bone microarchitecture was not significantly altered within the time course of this study, this was expected as our previous study also demonstrated little to no differences in the humeral head until the 16-week treatment time point.8 Increases in early bone metabolism support increased bone volume at the insertion at later stages. Taken together, gene expression and dynamic bone metabolism data suggest some increases in bone formation via PEMF exposure. Clinical studies correlate decreased humeral trabecular bone volume with age. Such degenerative changes of the humerus have been associated with the occurrence of rotator cuff tears45, and the association of rotator cuff tear with age is also well-established.46 The use of PEMF to address this aspect of rotator cuff integrity could be invaluable.

We were not able to draw clear conclusions regarding other pathways interrogated by gene expression, including mTOR and Wnt. Future studies will build on gene expression and protein quantification data, as it may provide further insight into native healing processes. There were interesting temporal patterns in the expression of many target genes.

Our study was not able to identify differences in tendon cell morphology, density/cellularity, or proliferation. We also did not measure a difference in the area of proteoglycan-rich fibrocartilage at the enthesis. This data suggests that increased cell organization, tenocyte proliferation, and fibrocartilage formation may not be processes involved in tendon-to-bone healing after rotator cuff repair when augmented with PEMF. Of note, although the study was not powered to address regional comparisons, qualitative regional differences in gene expression and cell morphology support the need to assess tendon responses to injury and/or therapeutic applications regionally. Tendon cell heterogeneity has only recently begun to be characterized and should be considered further in future studies.47

This study is not without limitations. Although the rat rotator cuff model of acute supraspinatus injury and immediate repair is well-established and has been used extensively in previous publications and in our previous work using PEMF, it does not represent the most common clinical presentation, which is a chronic condition. However, early repair failure can occur after acute tears10, and identifying and augmenting targets involved in early healing processes are important for re-establishing tendon-to-bone strength in both the acute and chronic patient populations. Our gene expression assessment required a large number of comparisons, with likelihood of some false positives. Further, we took a targeted approach to the evaluation of gene and protein expression; whole transcriptome and proteome analyses would likely provide more information. We selected our protein expression assay based on our limited sample volume; however, issues with sample stickiness led to low bead counts and read-out variability, and protein targets were limited by commercial availability of immunoassays. Therefore, we were able to relate very little of our gene expression data to the protein level. The use of immunohistochemistry to detect immune cells limits characterization of all tendon cell types, but was chosen to allow additional histological studies to be performed on the same samples. Additionally, animals were assigned to a single time point, leading to the inability to perform paired analyses across time points. The use of one or more longitudinal metrics, such as assessment of collagen synthesis via microdialysis could be useful. In this study, PEMF therapy was delivered systemically to match our previous study designs; future studies could assess if and how localized PEMF exposure may uniquely affect healing.

Previous work showing improved rotator cuff healing with PEMF, along with the non-invasive nature and history of clinical safety, supported the initiation of a PEMF clinical trial for use after rotator cuff repair. This study provides important biological insight into how PEMF affects cellular and molecular processes in the supraspinatus tendon after injury. The increased expression of genes that regulate production and organization of tendon extracellular matrix, shift towards an anti-inflammatory environment, and augmented humeral head bone formation observed in this study further support the potential promising use of PEMF as an adjuvant treatment to clinical improve rotator cuff repair healing and outcomes.

Supplementary Material

fs1

Supplemental Figure 1. Additional Gene Expression in the Tendon Insertion. At the tendon insertion, PEMF treatment did not have a significant effect (over time) on Bmp4, Bmp7, Bmpr1a, Bmpr1b, Bmpr2, Cttnb1, Fmod, Gdf5, Gsk3b, Il6, Lrp5, Mmp9, and Mkx. Data shown as individual data points and mean±SD; values were normalized to housekeeping genes and then normalized to non-PEMF at each time point (n=5/group/time point). Black bars indicate post-hoc significance (p<0.05).

fs2

Supplemental Figure 2. Additional Gene Expression in the Tendon Insertion. At the tendon insertion, PEMF treatment did not have a significant effect (over time) on Mtor, Nog, Postn, Rptor, Runx2, Scx, Srebf1, Tac1, Tgfb1, Tgfb2, Tgfbr2, Tnc, and Tnmd. Data shown as individual data points and mean±SD; values were normalized to housekeeping genes and then normalized to non-PEMF at each time point (n=5/group/time point). Black bars indicate post-hoc significance (p<0.05).

fs3

Supplemental Figure 3. TGFβ Signaling & Inflammation Related Gene Expression in the Tendon Midsubstance. At the tendon midsubstance, PEMF treatment (A) increased Ctgf (p=0.002), (B) increased Gdf5 (p=0.006), (C) increased Mmp13 (p=0.005), (D) increased Postn (p=0.01), (E) increased Scx at 7 days post-injury, (F) increased Tnc (p=0.009), (G) increased Ptgs2 (p=0.04), (H) increased Tac1 (p=0.001), and (I) decreased Tnf (p=0.04). P-values are listed for significant differences based on the individual variable of treatment as measured by two-way ANOVA. Black bars indicate post-hoc significance (p<0.05). Data shown as individual data points and mean±SD; values were normalized to housekeeping genes and then normalized to non-PEMF at each time point (n=5/group/time point).

fs4

Supplemental Figure 4. mTOR Signaling Pathway Related Gene Expression in the Tendon Midsubstance. At the tendon midsubstance, PEMF treatment (A) increased Fn1 (p=0.002), (B) decreased Rptor (p=0.05), and (C) decreased Srebf1 expression (p=0.0009). P-values are listed for significant differences based on the individual variable of treatment as measured by two-way ANOVA. Black bars indicate post-hoc significance (p<0.05). Data shown as individual data points and mean±SD; values were normalized to housekeeping genes and then normalized to non-PEMF at each time point (n=5/group/time point).

fs5

Supplemental Figure 5. Additional Gene Expression in the Tendon Midsubstance. At the tendon midsubstance, PEMF treatment did not have a significant effect (over time) on Alp1, Bglap, Bmp2, Bmp4, Bmp7, Bmpr1a, Bmpr1b, Bmpr2, Col1a, Ctnnb1, Fmod, Gsk3b, Il10, Il1b, and Il6. PEMF significantly decreased Lrp5 over time (p=0.02). Data shown as individual data points and mean±SD; values were normalized to housekeeping genes and then normalized to non-PEMF at each time point (n=5/group/time point). Black bars indicate post-hoc significance (p<0.05).

fs6

Supplemental Figure 6. Additional Gene Expression in the Tendon Midsubstance. At the tendon midsubstance, PEMF treatment did not have a significant effect (over time) on Mkx, Mmp9, Mtor, Nog, Runx2, Sox9, Tgfb1, Tgfb2, Tgfb3, Tgfbr2, and Tnmd. Data shown as individual data points and mean±SD; values were normalized to housekeeping genes and then normalized to non-PEMF at each time point (n=5/group/time point). Black bars indicate post-hoc significance (p<0.05).

fs7

Supplemental Figure 7. Protein Expression in the Tendon Insertion. At the tendon insertion, PEMF treatment did not have any significant effect on any measured protein concentrations across time (as measured by two-way ANOVA); measured proteins included (A) TGFβ1, (B) TGFβ2, (C) TGFβ3, (D) MCP1 (monocyte chemoattractant protein 1), (E) VEGF, (F) TIMP1, (G) IL-10, (H) IL-1β, (I) IL-17A, (J) caveolin-1, and (K) CTGF. Black bars indicate post-hoc significance between treatment groups at individual time points (p<0.05). Data shown as individual data points and mean±SD. Concentration measured in ng/ml (n=5/group/time point).

fs8

Supplemental Figure 8. Protein Expression in the Tendon Midsubstance. At the tendon midsubstance, PEMF treatment did not have any significant effect on any measured protein concentrations across time (as measured by two-way ANOVA); measured proteins included (A) TGFβ1, (B) TGFβ2, (C) TGFβ3, (D) MCP1 (monocyte chemoattractant protein 1), (E) VEGF, (F) TIMP1, (G) IL-10, (H) IL-1β, (I) IL-17A, and (J) caveolin-1. Black bars indicate post-hoc significance between treatment groups at individual time points (p<0.05). Data shown as individual data points and mean±SD. Concentration measured in ng/ml (n=5/group/time point).

fs9

Supplemental Figure 9. H&E Histological Properties. Semi-quantitative grading of histomorphological properties. No significant differences were found between treatment groups for (A) insertion cellularity, (B) insertion cell shape, (C) midsubstance cellularity, or (D) midsubstance cell shape. Midsubstance properties were altered over time (cellularity, p=0.001; cell shape, p<0.0001). Cellularity grading scale was set from 1 (less cells) to 3 (more cells). Cell shape grading scale was set from 1 (more spindle shaped) to 3 (more rounded shape). Data shown as median±IQR (n=5/group/time point).

fs10

Supplemental Figure 10. EdU Staining. Cross-linking of fluorescent azide to incorporated 5-Ethynyl-2´-deoxyuridine (EdU) allowed for quantification of proliferating cells in the (A) tendon insertion (B) and midsubstance. PEMF had no effect on the proliferation of cells within the tendon; proliferation decreased in both regions of interest across time. (B) Representative 100x images of control and PEMF-treated samples at 7 days post-injury. Pink, EdU incorporation; blue, DAPI (nuclei). Scale bar represents 250 μm.

fs11

Supplemental Figure 11. Macrophage IHC Images. Representative 100x images show CD68+ (M1) and CD163+ (M2) macrophage density in the insertion (top panels) and midsubstance (bottom panels) at 14 and 28 days. Scale bar represents 200 μm.

fs12

Supplemental Figure 12. Safranin O Staining. Histological staining for proteoglycans (indicator of fibrocartilaginous tissue) at the tendon enthesis. (A) PEMF had no significant effect on the quantity of proteoglycan-rich tissue at the enthesis (as measured on 200x regions of interest). Data shown as individual data points and mean±SD (n=5/group/time point). (B) Representative 50x images of control and PEMF-treated samples at 21 days post-injury. Scale bar represents 500 μm.

fs13

Supplemental Figure 13. Bone Microarchitecture. Bone properties of the greater tuberosity of the humerus as measured by μCT were largely unaffected by PEMF exposure. No differences were seen in (A) bone mineral content, (B) bone mineral density, (C) connectivity density, (D) bone volume/total volume (BV/TV), or (E) trabecular thickness. (F) Trabecular separation was decreased by PEMF (p=0.05). P-values are listed for significant differences based on the individual variable of treatment as measured by two-way ANOVA. Black bars indicate post-hoc significance (p<0.05). Data shown as individual data points and mean±SD (n=5/group/time point).

tS1

Supplemental Table 1. Target Genes Selected for Quantification. Genes were selected based on their relationship to signaling pathways and processes of interest; specific relationships are defined in the table. Several housekeeping genes were also included. Gapdh and Ppib were chosen for data normalization based on their consistency across time and treatment group.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS:

Funding was provided by Orthofix Medical, Inc. and the Penn Center for Musculoskeletal Disorders (P30 AR069619). We thank Dr. Matthew Counihan, Dr. Yaping Ye, Dr. Nathaniel Dyment, the Penn Molecular Profiling Facility, the Penn Human Immunology Core, and the PCMD MicroCT Imaging and Histology Cores for their assistance. We disclose that Orthofix Medical, Inc. employs Nianli Zhang and employed Erik Waldorff and James Ryaby during the time this work was completed.

References

  • 1.Boland K, Smith C, Bond H, Briggs S, Walton J. 2021. Current concepts in the rehabilitation of rotator cuff related disorders. J Clin Orthop Trauma 18:13–19. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Galatz LM, Ball CM, Teefey SA, et al. 2004. The outcome and repair integrity of completely arthroscopically repaired large and massive rotator cuff tears. J Bone Joint Surg Am 86-A:219–224.2. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Lovric V, Ledger M, Goldberg J, et al. 2013. The effects of low-intensity pulsed ultrasound on tendon-bone healing in a transosseous-equivalent sheep rotator cuff model. Knee SurgSports Traumatol Arthrosc 21:466–475. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Ng CO, Ng GY, See EK, Leung MC. 2003.Therapeutic ultrasound improves strength of Achilles tendon repair in rats. Ultrasound Med Biol. 29:1501–6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Joensen J, Gjerdet NR, Hummelsund S, Iversen V, Lopes-Martins RA, Bjordal JM. 2012. An experimental study of low-level laser therapy in rat Achilles tendon injury. Lasers Med Sci. 27:103–11. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Garland DE, Moses B, Salyer W. 1991. Long-term follow-up of fracture nonunions treated with PEMFs. Contemp Orthop. 22:295–302. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.US Food and Drug Administration. Premarket Approval (PMA) P850007. Silver Spring (MD): US Department of Health & Human Services; 1986. <https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfpma/pma.cfm?id=P850007>, accessed February 19, 2019. [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Tucker JJ, Cirone JM, Morris TR, et al. 2017. Pulsed electromagnetic field therapy improves tendon-to-bone healing in a rat rotator cuff repair model. J Orthop Res. 35:902–9. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Huegel J, Choi DS, Nuss CA, et al. 2018. Effects of pulsed electromagnetic field therapy at different frequencies and durations on rotator cuff tendon-to-bone healing in a rat model. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 27:553–560. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Lädermann A, Denard PJ, Burkhart SS. Management of failed rotator cuff repair: a systematic review. Journal of ISAKOS: Joint Disorders & Orthopaedic Sports Medicine 2016;1:32–37. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Huegel J, Boorman-Padgett JF, Nuss CA, Raja HA, Chan PY, Kuntz AF, Waldorff EI, Zhang N, Ryaby JT, Soslowsky LJ. 2020. Effects of Pulsed Electromagnetic Field Therapy on Rat Achilles Tendon Healing. J Orthop Res 38:70–81. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Kaji DA, Howell KL, Balic Z, Hubmacher D, Huang AH. 2020. Tgfβ signaling is required for tenocyte recruitment and functional neonatal tendon regeneration. Elife 9:e51779. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Schwarting T, Schenk D, Frink M, Benölken M, Steindor F, Oswald M, Ruchholtz S, Lechler P. 2016. Stimulation with bone morphogenetic protein-2 (BMP-2) enhances bone-tendon integration in vitro. Connect Tissue Res 57:99–112. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Yeh LC, Tsai AD, Lee JC. 2008. Bone morphogenetic protein-7 regulates differentially the mRNA expression of bone morphogenetic proteins and their receptors in rat achilles and patellar tendon cell cultures. J Cell Biochem 104:2107–22. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Lim J, Munivez E, Jiang MM, Song IW, Gannon F, Keene DR, Schweitzer R, Lee BH, Joeng KS. 2017. mTORC1 Signaling is a Critical Regulator of Postnatal Tendon Development. Sci Rep 7(1):171–175. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Cong XX, Rao XS, Lin JX, Liu XC, Zhang GA, Gao XK, He MY, Shen WL, Fan W, Pioletti D, Zheng LL, Liu HH, Yin Z, Low BC, Schweitzer R, Ouyang H, Chen X, Zhou YT. 2018. Activation of AKT-mTOR Signaling Directs Tenogenesis of Mesenchymal Stem Cells. Stem Cells 36:527–539. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Yao Z, Li J, Xiong H, Cui H, Ning J, Wang S, Ouyang X, Qian Y, Fan C. 2021. MicroRNA engineered umbilical cord stem cell-derived exosomes direct tendon regeneration by mTOR signaling. J Nanobiotechnol 19: 169. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Tian X, Jiang H, Chen Y, Ao X, Chen C, Zhang W, He F, Liao X, Jiang X, Li T, Zhang Z, Zhang X. 2018. Baicalein Accelerates Tendon-Bone Healing via Activation of Wnt/β-Catenin Signaling Pathway in Rats. Biomed Res Int 2018:3849760. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Dakin SG, Martinez FO, Yapp C, Wells G, Oppermann U, Dean BJ, Smith RD, Wheway K, Watkins B, Roche L, Carr AJ. 2015. Inflammation activation and resolution in human tendon disease. Sci Transl Med. 7:311ra173. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Ackerman JE, Best KT, Muscat SN, Loiselle AE. 2021. Metabolic Regulation of Tendon Inflammation and Healing Following Injury. Curr Rheumatol Rep 23: 15. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Selvamurugan N, Kwok S, Vasilov A, Jefcoat SC, Partridge NC. 2007. Effects of BMP-2 and pulsed electromagnetic field (PEMF) on rat primary osteoblastic cell proliferation and gene expression. J Orthop Res 25:1213–20. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Patterson TE, Sakai Y, Grabiner MD, Ibiwoye M, Midura RJ, Zborowski M, Wolfman A. 2006. Exposure of murine cells to pulsed electromagnetic fields rapidly activates the mTOR signaling pathway. Bioelectromagnetics. 27:535–44. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Kubat NJ, Moffett J, Fray LM. 2015. Effect of pulsed electromagnetic field treatment on programmed resolution of inflammation pathway markers in human cells in culture. J Inflamm Res. 8:59–69. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Taylor EM, Hardy KL, Alonso A, Pilla AA, Rohde CH. 2015. Pulsed electromagnetic fields dosing impacts postoperative pain in breast reduction patients. J Surg Res. 193:504–10. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Harper WL, Schmidt WK, Kubat NJ, Isenberg RA. 2014. An open-label pilot study of pulsed electromagnetic field therapy in the treatment of failed back surgery syndrome pain. Int Med Case Rep J. 8:13–22. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Peltz CD, Dourte LM, Kuntz AF, et al. 2009.The effect of postoperative passive motion on rotator cuff healing in a rat model. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 91:2421–9. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Thomopoulos S, Williams GR, Gimbel JA, Favata M, Soslowsky LJ. 2003. Variation of biomechanical, structural, and compositional properties along the tendon to bone insertion site. J Orthop Res. 21: 413–9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28.Gimbel JA, Van Kleunen JP, Mehta S, et al. 2004. Supraspinatus tendon organizational and mechanical properties in a chronic rotator cuff tear animal model. J Biomech. 37:739–49. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29.Mowbray FI, Fox-Wasylyshyn SM, El-Masri MM. 2019. Univariate Outliers: A Conceptual Overview for the Nurse Researcher. Can J Nurs Res. 51:31–37. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Fjeldbo CS, Aarnes EK, Malinen E, Kristensen GB, Lyng H (2016) Identification and Validation of Reference Genes for RT-qPCR Studies of Hypoxia in Squamous Cervical Cancer Patients. PLOS ONE 11(5): e0156259. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31.Mendias CL, Lynch EB, Gumucio JP, Flood MD, Rittman DS, Van Pelt DW, Roche SM, Davis CS. 2015. Changes in skeletal muscle and tendon structure and function following genetic inactivation of myostatin in rats. J Physiol 593:2037–52. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 32.Carpenter JE, Thomopoulos S, Flanagan CL, DeBano CM, Soslowsky LJ. 1998. Rotator cuff defect healing: a biomechanical and histologic analysis in an animal model. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 7:599–605. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 33.Minami K, Hiwatashi K, Ueno S, Sakoda M, Iino S, Okumura H, Hashiguchi M, Kawasaki Y, Kurahara H, Mataki Y, Maemura K, Shinchi H, Natsugoe S. 2018. Prognostic significance of CD68, CD163 and Folate receptor-β positive macrophages in hepatocellular carcinoma. Exp Ther Med 15: 4465–4476. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 34.Sollazzo V, Palmieri A, Pezzetti F, Massari L, Carinci F. 2010. Effects of pulsed electromagnetic fields on human osteoblast like cells (MG-63): a pilot study. Clin Orthop Relat Res 468:2260–77 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 35.Chalidis B, Sachinis N, Assiotis A, Maccauro G. 2011. Stimulation of bone formation and fracture healing with pulsed electromagnetic fields: biologic responses and clinical implications. Int J Immunopathol Pharmacol 24(1 Suppl 2):17–20. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 36.Snedeker JG, Foolen J. 2017. Tendon injury and repair- a perspective on the basic mechanisms of tendon disease and future clinical therapy. Acta Biomaterialia 63: 18–36. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 37.Juneja SC, Schwarz EM, O’Keefe RJ, Awad HA. 2013. Cellular and molecular factors in flexor tendon repair and adhesions: a histological and gene expression analysis. Connect Tissue Res 54:218–226. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 38.Miller SL, Coughlin DG, Waldorff EI, Ryaby JT, Lotz JC. 2016. Pulsed electromagnetic field (PEMF) treatment reduces expression of genes associated with disc degeneration in human intervertebral disc cells. Spine J. 16:770–6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 39.Chan AK, Tang X, Mummaneni NV, Coughlin D, Liebenberg E, Ouyang A, Dudli S, Lauricella M, Zhang N, Waldorff EI, Ryaby JT, Lotz JC. 2019. Pulsed electromagnetic fields reduce acute inflammation in the injured rat-tail intervertebral disc. JOR Spine 2:e1069. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 40.Ackerman JE, Geary MB, Orner CA, Bawany F, Loiselle AE. 2017. Obesity/Type II diabetes alters macrophage polarization resulting in a fibrotic tendon healing response. PLoS One 12:e0181127. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 41.Mauro A, Russo V, Di Marcantonio L, Berardinelli P, Martelli A, Muttini A, Mattioli M, Barboni B. 2016. M1 and M2 macrophage recruitment during tendon regeneration induced by amniotic epithelial cell allotransplantation in ovine. Res Vet Sci 105:92–102. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 42.Vinhas A, Almeida AF, Gonçalves AI, Rodrigues MT, Gomes ME. 2020. Magnetic Stimulation Drives Macrophage Polarization in Cell to-Cell Communication with IL-1β Primed Tendon Cells. Int J Mol Sci 21:5441. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 43.Midura RJ, Ibiwoye MO, Powell KA, Sakai Y, Doehring T, Grabiner MD, Patterson TE, Zborowski M, Wolfman A. Pulsed electromagnetic field treatments enhance the healing of fibular osteotomies. J Orthop Res. 2005. Sep;23(5):1035–46. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 44.Mooney V. A randomized double-blind prospective study of the efficacy of pulsed electromagnetic fields for interbody lumbar fusions. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1990. Jul;15(7):708–12 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 45.Jiang Y, Zhao J, van Holsbeeck MT, Flynn MJ, Ouyang X, Genant HK. 2002. Trabecular microstructure and surface changes in the greater tuberosity in rotator cuff tears. Skeletal Radiol. 31:522–8 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 46.Kholinne E, Lee HJ, Kim SJ, Park SH, Jeon IH. 2018. The relationship between age, rotator cuff integrity, and osseous microarchitecture of greater tuberosity: Where should we put anchor? Acta Orthop Traumatol Turc. 52:22–26. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 47.De Micheli AJ, Swanson JB, Disser NP, Martinez LM, Walker NR, Oliver DJ, Cosgrove BD, Mendias CL. Single-cell transcriptomic analysis identifies extensive heterogeneity in the cellular composition of mouse Achilles tendons. Am J Physiol Cell Physiol. 2020. Nov 1;319(5):C885–C894. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Associated Data

This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

Supplementary Materials

fs1

Supplemental Figure 1. Additional Gene Expression in the Tendon Insertion. At the tendon insertion, PEMF treatment did not have a significant effect (over time) on Bmp4, Bmp7, Bmpr1a, Bmpr1b, Bmpr2, Cttnb1, Fmod, Gdf5, Gsk3b, Il6, Lrp5, Mmp9, and Mkx. Data shown as individual data points and mean±SD; values were normalized to housekeeping genes and then normalized to non-PEMF at each time point (n=5/group/time point). Black bars indicate post-hoc significance (p<0.05).

NIHMS1747394-supplement-fs1.tiff (5.4MB, tiff)
fs2

Supplemental Figure 2. Additional Gene Expression in the Tendon Insertion. At the tendon insertion, PEMF treatment did not have a significant effect (over time) on Mtor, Nog, Postn, Rptor, Runx2, Scx, Srebf1, Tac1, Tgfb1, Tgfb2, Tgfbr2, Tnc, and Tnmd. Data shown as individual data points and mean±SD; values were normalized to housekeeping genes and then normalized to non-PEMF at each time point (n=5/group/time point). Black bars indicate post-hoc significance (p<0.05).

NIHMS1747394-supplement-fs2.tiff (5.2MB, tiff)
fs3

Supplemental Figure 3. TGFβ Signaling & Inflammation Related Gene Expression in the Tendon Midsubstance. At the tendon midsubstance, PEMF treatment (A) increased Ctgf (p=0.002), (B) increased Gdf5 (p=0.006), (C) increased Mmp13 (p=0.005), (D) increased Postn (p=0.01), (E) increased Scx at 7 days post-injury, (F) increased Tnc (p=0.009), (G) increased Ptgs2 (p=0.04), (H) increased Tac1 (p=0.001), and (I) decreased Tnf (p=0.04). P-values are listed for significant differences based on the individual variable of treatment as measured by two-way ANOVA. Black bars indicate post-hoc significance (p<0.05). Data shown as individual data points and mean±SD; values were normalized to housekeeping genes and then normalized to non-PEMF at each time point (n=5/group/time point).

NIHMS1747394-supplement-fs3.tiff (5MB, tiff)
fs4

Supplemental Figure 4. mTOR Signaling Pathway Related Gene Expression in the Tendon Midsubstance. At the tendon midsubstance, PEMF treatment (A) increased Fn1 (p=0.002), (B) decreased Rptor (p=0.05), and (C) decreased Srebf1 expression (p=0.0009). P-values are listed for significant differences based on the individual variable of treatment as measured by two-way ANOVA. Black bars indicate post-hoc significance (p<0.05). Data shown as individual data points and mean±SD; values were normalized to housekeeping genes and then normalized to non-PEMF at each time point (n=5/group/time point).

NIHMS1747394-supplement-fs4.tiff (1.9MB, tiff)
fs5

Supplemental Figure 5. Additional Gene Expression in the Tendon Midsubstance. At the tendon midsubstance, PEMF treatment did not have a significant effect (over time) on Alp1, Bglap, Bmp2, Bmp4, Bmp7, Bmpr1a, Bmpr1b, Bmpr2, Col1a, Ctnnb1, Fmod, Gsk3b, Il10, Il1b, and Il6. PEMF significantly decreased Lrp5 over time (p=0.02). Data shown as individual data points and mean±SD; values were normalized to housekeeping genes and then normalized to non-PEMF at each time point (n=5/group/time point). Black bars indicate post-hoc significance (p<0.05).

NIHMS1747394-supplement-fs5.tiff (5.2MB, tiff)
fs6

Supplemental Figure 6. Additional Gene Expression in the Tendon Midsubstance. At the tendon midsubstance, PEMF treatment did not have a significant effect (over time) on Mkx, Mmp9, Mtor, Nog, Runx2, Sox9, Tgfb1, Tgfb2, Tgfb3, Tgfbr2, and Tnmd. Data shown as individual data points and mean±SD; values were normalized to housekeeping genes and then normalized to non-PEMF at each time point (n=5/group/time point). Black bars indicate post-hoc significance (p<0.05).

NIHMS1747394-supplement-fs6.tiff (3.8MB, tiff)
fs7

Supplemental Figure 7. Protein Expression in the Tendon Insertion. At the tendon insertion, PEMF treatment did not have any significant effect on any measured protein concentrations across time (as measured by two-way ANOVA); measured proteins included (A) TGFβ1, (B) TGFβ2, (C) TGFβ3, (D) MCP1 (monocyte chemoattractant protein 1), (E) VEGF, (F) TIMP1, (G) IL-10, (H) IL-1β, (I) IL-17A, (J) caveolin-1, and (K) CTGF. Black bars indicate post-hoc significance between treatment groups at individual time points (p<0.05). Data shown as individual data points and mean±SD. Concentration measured in ng/ml (n=5/group/time point).

NIHMS1747394-supplement-fs7.tiff (5.2MB, tiff)
fs8

Supplemental Figure 8. Protein Expression in the Tendon Midsubstance. At the tendon midsubstance, PEMF treatment did not have any significant effect on any measured protein concentrations across time (as measured by two-way ANOVA); measured proteins included (A) TGFβ1, (B) TGFβ2, (C) TGFβ3, (D) MCP1 (monocyte chemoattractant protein 1), (E) VEGF, (F) TIMP1, (G) IL-10, (H) IL-1β, (I) IL-17A, and (J) caveolin-1. Black bars indicate post-hoc significance between treatment groups at individual time points (p<0.05). Data shown as individual data points and mean±SD. Concentration measured in ng/ml (n=5/group/time point).

NIHMS1747394-supplement-fs8.tiff (4.9MB, tiff)
fs9

Supplemental Figure 9. H&E Histological Properties. Semi-quantitative grading of histomorphological properties. No significant differences were found between treatment groups for (A) insertion cellularity, (B) insertion cell shape, (C) midsubstance cellularity, or (D) midsubstance cell shape. Midsubstance properties were altered over time (cellularity, p=0.001; cell shape, p<0.0001). Cellularity grading scale was set from 1 (less cells) to 3 (more cells). Cell shape grading scale was set from 1 (more spindle shaped) to 3 (more rounded shape). Data shown as median±IQR (n=5/group/time point).

NIHMS1747394-supplement-fs9.tiff (3.4MB, tiff)
fs10

Supplemental Figure 10. EdU Staining. Cross-linking of fluorescent azide to incorporated 5-Ethynyl-2´-deoxyuridine (EdU) allowed for quantification of proliferating cells in the (A) tendon insertion (B) and midsubstance. PEMF had no effect on the proliferation of cells within the tendon; proliferation decreased in both regions of interest across time. (B) Representative 100x images of control and PEMF-treated samples at 7 days post-injury. Pink, EdU incorporation; blue, DAPI (nuclei). Scale bar represents 250 μm.

NIHMS1747394-supplement-fs10.tiff (3.9MB, tiff)
fs11

Supplemental Figure 11. Macrophage IHC Images. Representative 100x images show CD68+ (M1) and CD163+ (M2) macrophage density in the insertion (top panels) and midsubstance (bottom panels) at 14 and 28 days. Scale bar represents 200 μm.

NIHMS1747394-supplement-fs11.tiff (4MB, tiff)
fs12

Supplemental Figure 12. Safranin O Staining. Histological staining for proteoglycans (indicator of fibrocartilaginous tissue) at the tendon enthesis. (A) PEMF had no significant effect on the quantity of proteoglycan-rich tissue at the enthesis (as measured on 200x regions of interest). Data shown as individual data points and mean±SD (n=5/group/time point). (B) Representative 50x images of control and PEMF-treated samples at 21 days post-injury. Scale bar represents 500 μm.

NIHMS1747394-supplement-fs12.tiff (4MB, tiff)
fs13

Supplemental Figure 13. Bone Microarchitecture. Bone properties of the greater tuberosity of the humerus as measured by μCT were largely unaffected by PEMF exposure. No differences were seen in (A) bone mineral content, (B) bone mineral density, (C) connectivity density, (D) bone volume/total volume (BV/TV), or (E) trabecular thickness. (F) Trabecular separation was decreased by PEMF (p=0.05). P-values are listed for significant differences based on the individual variable of treatment as measured by two-way ANOVA. Black bars indicate post-hoc significance (p<0.05). Data shown as individual data points and mean±SD (n=5/group/time point).

NIHMS1747394-supplement-fs13.tiff (3.6MB, tiff)
tS1

Supplemental Table 1. Target Genes Selected for Quantification. Genes were selected based on their relationship to signaling pathways and processes of interest; specific relationships are defined in the table. Several housekeeping genes were also included. Gapdh and Ppib were chosen for data normalization based on their consistency across time and treatment group.

NIHMS1747394-supplement-tS1.docx (200KB, docx)

RESOURCES