Does direction of induced electric field or current provide a test of mechanism involved in nerve regeneration?

Abstract

We suggest an experimental comparison of two directions for applying the time-varying magnetic fields which have been found to speed spontaneous regeneration of injured peripheral nerves and in attempts to repair spinal cord injuries. Time-varying magnetic fields induce currents in a plane perpendicular to the magnetic field direction. The lower conductivity of the spinal cord's sheath (dura matter) or of the myelin sheath of peripheral nerves would seem to confine the induced electric fields and currents to the spinal cord or nerve itself. The proposed comparison could allow choosing between two possible modes of action of the fields: (1) Magnetically-induced electric fields or currents may be encouraging ion flow or otherwise helping enzyme, channel or other interactions at the cell membrane, as is thought to be the case in field stimulation of healing in bone. This mechanism should be independent of field direction. (2) Work in developing organisms and with fields applied to nerve cells in vitro has shown that neurite growth is guided parallel to both endogenous and external electric fields. This mechanism would be effective when induced electric fields are parallel, but not when they are perpendicular to the nerve. Any experimental test should seek to produce as close as possible to the same induced current intensity with both field directions. Possible confounding factors, as well as breakdowns in the assumptions of the simple model presented here, would have to be considered. This proposal was motivated by a recent report in which the authors listed a changed field direction as one of several possible reasons for an unsuccessful experiment. © 2007 Wiley-Liss, Inc.