AI Chat Paper
Note: Please note that the following content is generated by AMiner AI. SciOpen does not take any responsibility related to this content.
{{lang === 'zh_CN' ? '文章概述' : 'Summary'}}
{{lang === 'en_US' ? '中' : 'Eng'}}
Chat more with AI
Powered by AMiner. Clicking this button will take you away from SciOpen.
Home Journal of Neurorestoratology Article
Article Link
Cite
EndNote(RIS) BibTeX
Collect
Submit Manuscript
Show Outline
Outline
Show full outline
Hide outline
Outline
Show full outline
Hide outline
Review | Open Access

Application and progress of magnetic field therapy for spinal cord injury

Zicai Liua( ), Zhanxiang Linb, Xuejin Liub, Xiuying Xiea( ), Cheng Tana( )
Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, Shaoguan First People's Hospital, Shaoguan 512000, Guangdong, China
School of Rehabilitation Medicine, Gannan Medical University, Ganzhou 341000, Jiangxi, China
Show Author Information

Abstract

Spinal cord injury (SCI), which results in severe neurological loss and multiple complications, remains a global health problem. Although SCI is a central nervous system injury, the field of related therapies has shown great promise, with breakthroughs regarding the theory of central nervous system irreparability. However, from the perspective of neuroprosthetics, the relevant basic theories are not always fully recognized or clearly understood, which poses a challenge to clinical practice guidance. Magnetic therapy technology has developed rapidly in recent years, and various magnetic therapy methods have emerged. Magnetic field therapy (MFT), with applications in SCI treatment, is considered a promising strategy for nerve repair and provides a theoretical foundation for subsequent research. MFT, including transcranial magnetic stimulation, static magnetic field, and pulsed electromagnetic field, has been used preclinically, and clinical studies have shown potential efficacy in SCI. Moreover, preclinical studies have revealed that MFT promotes nerve repair, reduces inflammatory responses, improves motor function, and enhances bladder control. They have also demonstrated that MFT is safe in human SCI patients and may improve motor function and pain control. However, its translation from preclinical studies to clinical application faces many challenges, including biological differences, determination of dose and treatment parameters, assessment of safety and side effects, and ethical and regulatory compliance. The present article aims to provide a comprehensive review of the applications and advances of MFT in SCI, to guide future research and provide a reference for clinical treatment. An in-depth discussion of MFT in the field of SCI may provide new ideas and directions for neural repair in SCI.

Keywords

Magnetic field therapySpinal cord injuryNeuroprostheticsReview

References

1

Varma AK, Das A, Wallace G, et al. Spinal cord injury: a review of current therapy, future treatments, and basic science frontiers. Neurochem Res. 2013;38(5):895–905. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11064-013-0991-6.
Crossref Google Scholar
2

Sweis R, Biller J. Systemic complications of spinal cord injury. Curr Neurol Neurosci Rep. 2017;17(2):8. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11910-017-0715-4.
Crossref Google Scholar
3

Becker D, McDonald JW. Approaches to repairing the damaged spinal cord: overview. Handb Clin Neurol. 2012;109:445–461. https://doi.org/10.1016/b978-0-444-52137-8.00028-0.
Crossref Google Scholar
4

Guan B, Anderson DB, Chen LX, et al. Global, regional and national burden of traumatic brain injury and spinal cord injury, 1990–2019: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2019. BMJ Open. 2023;13(10):e075049. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2023-075049.
Crossref Google Scholar
5

Quadri SA, Farooqui M, Ikram A, et al. Recent update on basic mechanisms of spinal cord injury. Neurosurg Rev. 2020;43(2):425–441. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10143-018-1008-3.
Crossref Google Scholar
6

Lu YB, Shang ZZ, Zhang W, et al. Global incidence and characteristics of spinal cord injury since 2000–2021: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BMC Med. 2024;22(1):285. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12916-024-03514-9.
Crossref Google Scholar
7

Pataraia A, Crevenna R. Challenges in rehabilitation of patients with nontraumatic spinal cord dysfunction due to tumors: a narrative review. Wien Klin Wochenschr. 2019;131(23/24):608–613. https://doi.org/10.1007/s508-019-1528-z.
Crossref Google Scholar
8

Dumont RJ, Okonkwo DO, Verma S, et al. Acute spinal cord injury, part Ⅰ: pathophysiologic mechanisms. Clin Neuropharmacol. 2001;24(5):254–264. https://doi.org/10.1097/00002826-200109000-00002.
Crossref Google Scholar
9

Oyinbo CA. Secondary injury mechanisms in traumatic spinal cord injury: a nugget of this multiply cascade. Acta Neurobiol Exp. 2011;71(2):281–299. https://doi.org/10.55782/ane-2011-1848.
Crossref Google Scholar
10

Wilson JR, Hashimoto RE, Dettori JR, et al. Spinal cord injury and quality of life: a systematic review of outcome measures. Evid Base Spine Care J. 2011;2(1):37–44. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0030-1267085.
Crossref Google Scholar
11

John Hurlbert R. Methylprednisolone for the treatment of acute spinal cord injury: point. Neurosurgery. 2014;61(suppl 1):32–35. https://doi.org/10.1227/NEU.0000000000000393.
Crossref Google Scholar
12

Fehlings MG, Vaccaro A, Wilson JR, et al. Early versus delayed decompression for traumatic cervical spinal cord injury: results of the Surgical Timing in Acute Spinal Cord Injury Study (STASCIS). PLoS One. 2012;7(2):e32037. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0032037.
Crossref Google Scholar
13

Wilson JR, Tetreault LA, Kwon BK, et al. Timing of decompression in patients with acute spinal cord injury: a systematic review. Glob Spine J. 2017;7(3 suppl l):95S-115S. https://doi.org/10.1177/2192568217701716.
Crossref Google Scholar
14

Su DB, Zhao ZX, Yin DC, et al. Promising application of pulsed electromagnetic fields on tissue repair and regeneration. Prog Biophys Mol Biol. 2024;187:36–50. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pbiomolbio.2024.01.003.
Crossref Google Scholar
15

Wu ZY, Ding X, Lei GH, et al. Efficacy and safety of the pulsed electromagnetic field in osteoarthritis: a meta-analysis. BMJ Open. 2018;8(12):e022879. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2018-022879.
Crossref Google Scholar
16

Flatscher J, Pavez Loriè E, Mittermayr R, et al. Pulsed electromagnetic fields (PEMF)-physiological response and its potential in trauma treatment. Int J Mol Sci. 2023;24(14):11239. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms241411239.
Crossref Google Scholar
17

Li Q, Liao ZC, Gu LL, et al. Moderate intensity static magnetic fields prevent Thrombus formation in rats and mice. Bioelectromagnetics. 2020;41(1):52–62. https://doi.org/10.1002/bem.22232.
Crossref Google Scholar
18

Bassett CA, Pilla AA, Pawluk RJ. A non-operative salvage of surgically-resistant pseudarthroses and non-unions by pulsing electromagnetic fields. A preliminary report. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1977;(124):128–143.
Crossref Google Scholar
19

Funk RH.W, Fähnle M. A short review on the influence of magnetic fields on neurological diseases. Front Biosci: Schol Ed. 2021;13(2):181–189. https://doi.org/10.52586/s561.
Crossref Google Scholar
20

Chen L, Klooster DC.W, Tik M, et al. Accelerated repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation to treat major depression: the past, present, and future. Harv Rev Psychiatr. 2023;31(3):142–161. https://doi.org/10.1097/HRP.0000000000000364.
Crossref Google Scholar
21

Gao F, Wang S, Guo Y, et al. Protective effects of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation in a rat model of transient cerebral ischaemia: a microPET study. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imag. 2010;37(5):954–961. https://doi.org/10.1007/s259-009-1342-3.
Crossref Google Scholar
22

Prasad A, Teh DB.L, Blasiak A, et al. Static magnetic field stimulation enhances oligodendrocyte differentiation and secretion of neurotrophic factors. Sci Rep. 2017;7(1):6743. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-017-06331-8.
Crossref Google Scholar
23

Afifi L, Jarrett Rushmore R, Valero-Cabré A. Benefit of multiple sessions of perilesional repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation for an effective rehabilitation of visuospatial function. Eur J Neurosci. 2013;37(3):441–454. https://doi.org/10.1111/ejn.12055.
Crossref Google Scholar
24

Grehl S, Viola HM, Fuller-Carter PI, et al. Cellular and molecular changes to cortical neurons following low intensity repetitive magnetic stimulation at different frequencies. Brain Stimul. 2015;8(1):114–123. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brs.2014.09.012.
Crossref Google Scholar
25

van der Worp HB, Howells DW, Sena ES, et al. Can animal models of disease reliably inform human studies? PLoS Med. 2010;7(3):e1000245. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1000245.
Crossref Google Scholar
26

David S, López-Vales R, Wee Yong V. Harmful and beneficial effects of inflammation after spinal cord injury: potential therapeutic implications. Handb Clin Neurol. 2012;109:485–502. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-444-52137-8.00030-9.
Crossref Google Scholar
27

Goldshmit Y, Shalom M, Ruban A. Treatment with pulsed extremely low frequency electromagnetic field (PELF-EMF) exhibit anti-inflammatory and neuroprotective effect in compression spinal cord injury model. Biomedicines. 2022;10(2):325. https://doi.org/10.3390/biomedicines10020325.
Crossref Google Scholar
28

Vincenzi F, Ravani A, Pasquini S, et al. Pulsed electromagnetic field exposure reduces hypoxia and inflammation damage in neuron-like and microglial cells. J Cell Physiol. 2017;232(5):1200–1208. https://doi.org/10.1002/jcp.25606.
Crossref Google Scholar
29

Ambalayam S, Jain S, Mathur R. Abnormal feeding behaviour in spinalised rats is mediated by hypothalamus: restorative effect of exposure to extremely low frequency magnetic field. Spinal Cord. 2016;54(12):1076–1087. https://doi.org/10.1038/sc.2016.32.
Crossref Google Scholar
30

Dey S, Bose S, Kumar S, et al. Extremely low frequency magnetic field protects injured spinal cord from the microglia- and iron-induced tissue damage. Electromagn Biol Med. 2017;36(4):330–340. https://doi.org/10.1080/15368378.2017.1389750.
Crossref Google Scholar
31

Su JH, Zhou FJ, Hu MX, et al. The effect of repetitive magnetic stimulation on neuronal apoptosis and PI3K/Akt protein expression in rats with incomplete spinal cord injury. J Neurophysiol. 2024;132(4):1211–1222. https://doi.org/10.1152/jn.00210.2024.
Crossref Google Scholar
32

Wang CY, Liu Y, Wang Y, et al. Low-frequency pulsed electromagnetic field promotes functional recovery, reduces inflammation and oxidative stress, and enhances HSP70 expression following spinal cord injury. Mol Med Rep. 2019;19(3):1687–1693. https://doi.org/10.3892/mmr.2019.9820.
Crossref Google Scholar
33

Kim HJ, Jung J, Park JH, et al. Extremely low-frequency electromagnetic fields induce neural differentiation in bone marrow derived mesenchymal stem cells. Exp Biol Med: Maywood. 2013;238(8):923–931. https://doi.org/10.1177/1535370213497173.
Crossref Google Scholar
34

Park JE, Seo YK, Yoon HH, et al. Electromagnetic fields induce neural differentiation of human bone marrow derived mesenchymal stem cells via ROS mediated EGFR activation. Neurochem Int. 2013;62(4):418–424. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuint.2013.02.002.
Crossref Google Scholar
35

Ma QL, Deng P, Zhu G, et al. Extremely low-frequency electromagnetic fields affect transcript levels of neuronal differentiation-related genes in embryonic neural stem cells. PLoS One. 2014;9(3):e90041. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0090041.
Crossref Google Scholar
36

Seong Y, Moon J, Kim J. Egr 1 mediated the neuronal differentiation induced by extremely low-frequency electromagnetic fields. Life Sci. 2014;102(1):16–27. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lfs.2014.02.022.
Crossref Google Scholar
37

Ma QL, Chen CH, Deng P, et al. Extremely low-frequency electromagnetic fields promote in vitro neuronal differentiation and neurite outgrowth of embryonic neural stem cells via up-regulating TRPC1. PLoS One. 2016;11(3):e0150923. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0150923.
Crossref Google Scholar
38

Skaper SD. Oligodendrocyte precursor cells as a therapeutic target for demyelinating diseases. Prog Brain Res. 2019;245:119–144. https://doi.org/10.1016/bs.pbr.2019.03.013.
Crossref Google Scholar
39

Yao F, Li ZY, Cheng L, et al. Low frequency pulsed electromagnetic field promotes differentiation of oligodendrocyte precursor cells through upregulation of miR-219-5p in vitro. Life Sci. 2019;223:185–193. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lfs.2019.03.031.
Crossref Google Scholar
40

Seo N, Lee SH, Ju KW, et al. Low-frequency pulsed electromagnetic field pretreated bone marrow-derived mesenchymal stem cells promote the regeneration of crush-injured rat mental nerve. Neural Regen Res. 2018;13(1):145–153. https://doi.org/10.4103/1673-5374.224383.
Crossref Google Scholar
41

Lin LY, Lin HF, Bai S, et al. Bone marrow mesenchymal stem cells (BMSCs) improved functional recovery of spinal cord injury partly by promoting axonal regeneration. Neurochem Int. 2018;115:80–84. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuint.2018.02.007.
Crossref Google Scholar
42

Yuan YM, He C. The glial scar in spinal cord injury and repair. Neurosci Bull. 2013;29(4):421–435. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12264-013-1358-3.
Crossref Google Scholar
43

Fan YX, Ji XM, Zhang L, et al. The analgesic effects of static magnetic fields. Bioelectromagnetics. 2021;42(2):115–127. https://doi.org/10.1002/bem.22323.
Crossref Google Scholar
44

Mert T. Pulsed magnetic field treatment as antineuropathic pain therapy. Rev Neurosci. 2017;28(7):751–758. https://doi.org/10.1515/revneuro-2017-0003.
Crossref Google Scholar
45

Kumar S, Dey S, Jain S. Extremely low-frequency electromagnetic fields: a possible non-invasive therapeutic tool for spinal cord injury rehabilitation. Electromagn Biol Med. 2017;36(1):88–101. https://doi.org/10.1080/15368378.2016.1194290.
Crossref Google Scholar
46

Xu XR, Fu SX, Shi XM, et al. Microglial BDNF, PI3K, and p-ERK in the spinal cord are suppressed by pulsed radiofrequency on dorsal root ganglion to ease SNI-induced neuropathic pain in rats. Pain Res Manag. 2019;2019:5948686. https://doi.org/10.1155/2019/5948686.
Crossref Google Scholar
47

Chalfouh C, Guillou C, Hardouin J, et al. The regenerative effect of trans-spinal magnetic stimulation after spinal cord injury: mechanisms and pathways underlying the effect. Neurotherapeutics. 2020;17(4):2069–2088. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13311-020-00915-5.
Crossref Google Scholar
48

Chakraborty A, Sharma MC, Vishnubhatla S, et al. Electromagnetic field stimulation facilitates motor neuron excitability, myogenesis and muscle contractility in spinal cord transected rats. J Bio Sci. 2022;47:78.
Crossref Google Scholar
49

Tazoe T, Perez MA. Effects of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation on recovery of function after spinal cord injury. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2015;96(4 suppl l):S145-S155. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apmr.2014.07.418.
Crossref Google Scholar
50

Pal A, Kumar S, Jain S, et al. Neuroregenerative effects of electromagnetic field and magnetic nanoparticles on spinal cord injury in rats. J Nanosci Nanotechnol. 2018;18(10):6756–6764. https://doi.org/10.1166/jnn.2018.15820.
Crossref Google Scholar
51

Delarue Q, Robac A, Massardier R, et al. Comparison of the effects of two therapeutic strategies based on olfactory ensheathing cell transplantation and repetitive magnetic stimulation after spinal cord injury in female mice. J Neurosci Res. 2021;99(7):1835–1849. https://doi.org/10.1002/jnr.24836.
Crossref Google Scholar
52

Leydeker M, Delva S, Tserlyuk I, et al. The effects of 15 Hz trans-spinal magnetic stimulation on locomotor control in mice with chronic contusive spinal cord injury. Electromagn Biol Med. 2013;32(2):155–164. https://doi.org/10.3109/15368378.2013.776353.
Crossref Google Scholar
53

Bhattacharyya S, Sahu S, Kaur S, et al. Effect of low intensity magnetic field stimulation on calcium-mediated cytotoxicity after mild spinal cord contusion injury in rats. Ann Neurosci. 2020;27(2):49–56. https://doi.org/10.1177/0972753120950072.
Crossref Google Scholar
54

Zhang LC, Xiao ZH, Su ZL, et al. Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation promotes motor function recovery in mice after spinal cord injury via regulation of the Cx43-autophagy loop. J Orthop Surg Res. 2024;19(1):387. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13018-024-04879-6.
Crossref Google Scholar
55

Marufa SA, Hsieh TH, Liou JC, et al. Neuromodulatory effects of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation on neural plasticity and motor functions in rats with an incomplete spinal cord injury: a preliminary study. PLoS One. 2021;16(6):e0252965. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0252965.
Crossref Google Scholar
56

Jiang GH, Song HW, Han X, et al. Low frequency of repetitive trans-spinal magnetic stimulation promotes functional recovery after spinal cord injury in mice through inhibiting TGF-β1/Smad 2/3 signaling pathway. Neurosci Lett. 2024;836:137890. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neulet.2024.137890.
Crossref Google Scholar
57

Robac A, Neveu P, Hugede A, et al. Repetitive trans spinal magnetic stimulation improves functional recovery and tissue repair in contusive and penetrating spinal cord injury models in rats. Biomedicines. 2021;9(12):1827. https://doi.org/10.3390/biomedicines9121827.
Crossref Google Scholar
58

Vinit S, Keomani E, Deramaudt TB, et al. Interdisciplinary approaches of transcranial magnetic stimulation applied to a respiratory neuronal circuitry model. PLoS One. 2014;9(11):e113251. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0113251.
Crossref Google Scholar
59

Huang LY, Sun X, Wang L, et al. Enhanced effect of combining bone marrow mesenchymal stem cells (BMMSCs) and pulsed electromagnetic fields (PEMF) to promote recovery after spinal cord injury in mice. MedComm. 2022;3(3):e160. https://doi.org/10.1002/mco2.160.
Crossref Google Scholar
60

Wang L, Zhao H, Han M, et al. Electromagnetic cellularized patch with wirelessly electrical stimulation for promoting neuronal differentiation and spinal cord injury repair. Adv Sci: Weinh. 2024;11(30):e2307527. https://doi.org/10.1002/advs.202307527.
Crossref Google Scholar
61

Sato S, Kakuda W, Sano M, et al. Therapeutic application of transcranial magnetic stimulation combined with rehabilitative training for incomplete spinal cord injury: a case report. Prog Rehabil Med. 2018;3:20180014. https://doi.org/10.2490/prm.20180014.
Crossref Google Scholar
62

Benito J, Kumru H, Murillo N, et al. Motor and gait improvement in patients with incomplete spinal cord injury induced by high-frequency repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation. Top Spinal Cord Inj Rehabil. 2012;18(2):106–112. https://doi.org/10.1310/sci1802-106.
Crossref Google Scholar
63

Deng LY, Song N, Wang J, et al. Effect of intermittent Theta burst stimulation dual-target stimulation on lower limb function in patients with incomplete spinal cord injury: a randomized, single-blind, sham-controlled study. World Neurosurg. 2024;190:e46-e59. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wneu.2024.06.141.
Crossref Google Scholar
64

Lin BS, Zhang Z, Peng CW, et al. Effectiveness of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation combined with transspinal electrical stimulation on corticospinal excitability for individuals with incomplete spinal cord injury: a pilot study. IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng. 2023;31:4790–4800. https://doi.org/10.1109/TNSRE.2023.3338226.
Crossref Google Scholar
65

de Araújo AV.L, Barbosa VR.N, Galdino GS, et al. Effects of high-frequency transcranial magnetic stimulation on functional performance in individuals with incomplete spinal cord injury: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial. Trials. 2017;18(1):522. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13063-017-2280-1.
Crossref Google Scholar
66

Zhao CG, Sun W, Ju F, et al. Analgesic effects of directed repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation in acute neuropathic pain after spinal cord injury. Pain Med. 2020;21(6):1216–1223. https://doi.org/10.1093/pm/pnz290.
Crossref Google Scholar
67

Sun XL, Long H, Zhao CG, et al. Analgesia-enhancing effects of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation on neuropathic pain after spinal cord injury: an fNIRS study. Restor Neurol Neurosci. 2019;37(5):497–507. https://doi.org/10.3233/RNN-190934.
Crossref Google Scholar
68

Kuppuswamy A, Balasubramaniam AV, Maksimovic R, et al. Action of 5 Hz repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation on sensory, motor and autonomic function in human spinal cord injury. Clin Neurophysiol. 2011;122(12):2452–2461. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clinph.2011.04.022.
Crossref Google Scholar
69

Tian T, Zhang SS, Yang MJ. Recent progress and challenges in the treatment of spinal cord injury. Protein Cell. 2023;14(9):635–652. https://doi.org/10.1093/procel/pwad003.
Crossref Google Scholar
70

Ridlen R, McGrath K, Gorrie CA. Animal models of compression spinal cord injury. J Neurosci Res. 2022;100(12):2201–2212. https://doi.org/10.1002/jnr.25120.
Crossref Google Scholar
Journal of Neurorestoratology
Volume 13 Issue 3,
June 2025
DOI: 10.1016/j.jnrt.2025.100205
Cite this article:
Liu Z, Lin Z, Liu X, et al. Application and progress of magnetic field therapy for spinal cord injury. Journal of Neurorestoratology, 2025, 13(3). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jnrt.2025.100205

104

Views

0

Crossref

0

Web of Science

0

Scopus

Altmetrics
Received: 01 November 2024
Revised: 12 January 2025
Accepted: 25 February 2025
Published: 01 June 2025
© 2025 The Author(s).

This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
Return