Achieving functional restoration of diseased or injured tissues is the ultimate goal of both regenerative medicine approaches and physical therapy interventions. Proper integration and healing of the surrogate cells, tissues, or organs introduced using regenerative medicine techniques are often dependent on the co-introduction of therapeutic physical stimuli. Thus, regenerative rehabilitation represents a collaborative approach whereby rehabilitation specialists, basic scientists, physicians, and surgeons work closely to enhance tissue restoration by creating tailored rehabilitation treatments. One of the primary treatment regimens that physical therapists use to promote tissue healing is the introduction of mechanical forces, or mechanotherapies. These mechanotherapies in regenerative rehabilitation activate specific biological responses in musculoskeletal tissues to enhance the integration, healing, and restorative capacity of implanted cells, tissues, or synthetic scaffolds. To become future leaders in the field of regenerative rehabilitation, physical therapists must understand the principles of mechanobiology and how mechanotherapies augment tissue responses. This perspective article provides an overview of mechanotherapy and discusses how mechanical signals are transmitted at the tissue, cellular, and molecular levels. The synergistic effects of physical interventions and pharmacological agents also are discussed. The goals are to highlight the critical importance of mechanical signals on biological tissue healing and to emphasize the need for collaboration within the field of regenerative rehabilitation. As this field continues to emerge, physical therapists are poised to provide a critical contribution by integrating mechanotherapies with regenerative medicine to restore musculoskeletal function.

No abstract

BackgroundLigament injuries are common clinical problems for which there are few established interventions. Instrument-assisted cross fiber massage (IACFM) was recently shown to accelerate the restoration of biomechanical properties in injured rodent knee medial collateral ligaments (MCL). The current study aimed to investigate the influence of IACFM on regional perfusion and vascularity in the vicinity of healing rodent knee MCL injuries.MethodsBilateral knee MCL injuries were induced in female Sprague–Dawley rats. Commencing 1 week post-injury, 1 minute of IACFM was introduced unilaterally 3 times/week for 3 weeks. The contralateral injured MCL served as an internal control. Regional tissue perfusion was assessed in vivo throughout healing using laser Doppler imaging, whereas regional microvascular morphology was assessed ex vivo via micro-computed tomography of vessels filled with contrast.ResultsIACFM had no effect on tissue perfusion when assessed immediately, or at 5, 10, 15 or 20 min following intervention (all p > 0.05). However, IACFM-treated hindlimbs had enhanced tissue perfusion when assessed 1 day following the 4th and 9th (last) treatment sessions (all p < 0.05). IACFM-treated hindlimbs also had greater perfusion when assessed 1 wk following the final treatment session (32 days post-injury) (p < 0.05). Subsequent investigation of microvascular morphology found IACFM to increase the proportion of arteriole-sized blood vessels (5.9 to <41.2 μm) in the tibial third of the ligament (p < 0.05).ConclusionsThese findings suggest IACFM alters regional perfusion and vascularity in the vicinity of healing rodent knee MCL injuries. This effect may contribute to the beneficial effect of IACFM observed on the recovery of knee ligament biomechanical properties following injury.

Successful fracture healing requires the simultaneous regeneration of both the bone and vasculature; mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) are directed to replace the bone tissue, while endothelial progenitor cells (EPCs) form the new vasculature that supplies blood to the fracture site. In the elderly, the healing process is slowed, partly due to decreased regenerative function of these stem and progenitor cells. MSCs from older individuals are impaired with regard to cell number, proliferative capacity, ability to migrate, and osteochondrogenic differentiation potential. The proliferation, migration and function of EPCs are also compromised with advanced age. Although the reasons for cellular dysfunction with age are complex and multidimensional, reduced expression of growth factors, accumulation of oxidative damage from reactive oxygen species, and altered signaling of the Sirtuin-1 pathway are contributing factors to aging at the cellular level of both MSCs and EPCs. Because of these geriatric-specific issues, effective treatment for fracture repair may require new therapeutic techniques to restore cellular function. Some suggested directions for potential treatments include cellular therapies, pharmacological agents, treatments targeting age-related molecular mechanisms, and physical therapeutics. Advanced age is the primary risk factor for a fracture, due to the low bone mass and inferior bone quality associated with aging; a better understanding of the dysfunctional behavior of the aging cell will provide a foundation for new treatments to decrease healing time and reduce the development of complications during the extended recovery from fracture healing in the elderly.

No abstract