Ultrasound-Guided Hyaluronic Acid Injections for Trigger Finger: A Double-Blinded, Randomized Controlled Trial

A Practical Guide to Injection Therapy in Hand Tendinopathies: A Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials

Hand tendinopathies represent a pathological condition associated with significant disability. However, due to this high heterogeneity of the treatments and their efficacy, there is still a lack of consensus on the infiltrative therapy of the hand. This systematic review aimed to investigate the efficacy of injection techniques in the treatment of pain related to the main hand tendinopathies. We searched online medical databases (PubMed, Pedro, Cochrane Library, Scopus, and WoS). Only RCTs published in the last 10 years (up to 5 August 2024), written in English, and related to infiltrative treatment in wrist and hand tendinopathies were evaluated. The risk of bias in RCTs was assessed with Version 2 of the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool for randomized trials (RoB 2). Out of 641 articles identified, 23 were included in the final synthesis: 14 RCTs on trigger finger, and 9 RCTs on de Quervain's tenosynovitis. The present systematic review showed that infiltrative therapy of trigger finger and de Quervain's tenosynovitis constitutes a fundamental element in the treatment of these pathological conditions, in terms of pain reduction and improvement in the functionality of the hand.

Minimal clinically important difference of the Michigan Hand Outcomes Questionnaire score and the pain visual analogue scale in conservative treatment of trigger finger

We investigated the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) of the Michigan Hand Outcomes Questionnaire (MHQ) and the pain visual analogue scale (VAS-pain) after conservative treatment of trigger finger. This secondary analysis of a randomized controlled trial compared pain reduction, symptoms and functional improvement at 12 weeks. Patients included were at least 18 years old and able to complete MHQ and VAS-pain at enrolment and 12 weeks after treatment. The MCIDs of MHQ and VAS-pain were evaluated using a distribution-based, anchor-based and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve-based approach. Of the 117 patients, the MCIDs of MHQ and VAS-pain using a distribution-based approach were 5.3 and 0.6, respectively; applying ROC method were 23.5 and 2.5, respectively; and using anchor questions were 15 and 2, respectively. These MCID values by anchor-based method with a minimal difference of 15 for MHQ and 2 for VAS-pain are recommended as primary evidence to determine clinically significant improvement after conservative treatment of trigger finger.Level of evidence: I.

Tendon injections - upper extremity

Imaging-guided tendon procedures aim to reduce pain and increase function by controlling inflammation and stimulating healing. Ultrasound is the preferable guiding modality due to its high resolution and real-time demonstration of the tendinous anatomy and needle positioning. The technique includes appropriate patient positioning, which varies depending on the targeted tendon, as well as sterile and proper draping. For most procedures, we prefer the "in-plane" approach, which demonstrates the entire needle as it advances through different tissue layers. Upper limb injections commonly use corticosteroids and anesthetics with different reported short- and long-term results depending on the tendon treated; better results are obtained in the treatment of tenosynovitis (sliding tendons such as trigger finger and De Quervain's tenosynovitis). Shoulder and elbow tendinopathies (anchor tendons) may also benefit from injections containing irritants or healing stimulants such as dextrose (prolotherapy) and platelet-rich plasma or by the stimulation of healing via tendon perforations (fenestration). The hyaluronic acid injection has also been used in the treatment of both tenosynovitis and tendinopathies. For tendons passing through osteofibrous tunnels, an additional release may be performed, and the techniques are discussed in this review. Therefore, this article provides practicing musculoskeletal radiologists and trainees with a comprehensive review of tendon injection musculoskeletal image-guided procedures.

Effects of hyaluronic acid injections on pain and functioning in patients affected by tendinopathies: A narrative review

BACKGROUND

Tendinopathies are overuse tendon injuries showing load-dependant pain, stiffness, weakness of movement in the affected area, and impairment in the movements. The scientific interest on the role of Hyaluronic Acid (HA) for the management of tendinopathies has been increased due to its anti-inflammatory and lubricative properties.

OBJECTIVE

To collect evidence regarding the effectiveness and safety of HA injections in reducing pain in patients affected by tendinopathies.

METHODS

A scientific literature search was conducted using the PubMed, Medline and PEDro electronic databases. The databases were searched since their inception until July 2021. The search was limited to English language articles. Different combinations of the terms and MeSH terms "tendinopathy", "tendinosis", "tendinitis", "hyaluronic acid", "hyaluronate", "infiltration", "hyaluronic injections", "viscosupplementation" connected with various boolean operators were used for other electronic databases.

RESULTS

One hundred and one records were identified from the selected databases plus three additional papers identified by the authors through other sources. After removing duplicated papers and title/abstract screening, 19 studies were included in our review (eight papers on shoulder, three on elbow, four on hand, one on knee, and three on ankle).

CONCLUSION

The results showed that none of the studies report severe adverse effects and most of them support the use of HA injections in tendinopathies, with a special attention to pain reduction and functional assessment. Further studies are warranted to better investigate effects and methods of administration of HA in tendinopathies.

The Role of Hyaluronic Acid for Soft Tissue Indications: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

CONTEXT

Soft tissue injuries are often treated with injectables such as corticosteroids and platelet-rich plasma (PRP) to reduce inflammation and promote healing. There is increasing evidence examining the use of hyaluronic acid (HA) for the management of soft tissue injuries.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the treatment effect and role of HA for available soft tissue indications.

DATA SOURCES

A search of PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CENTRAL from the inception date of each database through February 24, 2021, was conducted for all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) involving the use of HA for soft tissue indications. Two reviewers independently screened articles for eligibility and extracted data from included studies for analysis. We assessed risk of bias for all included studies and pooled outcomes using a fixed-effects model. Outcomes (ie, function and pain relief) were categorized to short-term (<6 weeks, 6-12 weeks) and mid-term (>12 weeks) data. We present effect estimates as mean differences (MDs) and standardized mean differences (SMDs) and present the estimate of effect of HA for available indications in relation to available comparators.

STUDY DESIGN

Meta-analysis of RCTs.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level 1.

RESULTS

Of the 6930 articles screened, 19 RCTs (n = 1629 patients) were eligible and included in this review. HA was evaluated across a variety of soft tissue indications including rotator cuff disease, elbow pain, ankle sprains, Achilles tendinopathy, patellar tendinopathy, and trigger finger. Of the 19 RCTs, 11 were placebo-controlled and 9 used active comparators (PRP, cortisone, prolotherapy, or extracorporeal shockwave therapy). The pooled treatment effect of HA across most soft indications against placebo and active comparators demonstrated benefit in short-term pain <6 weeks (MD visual analogue scale [VAS] 2.48, 95% CI 2.31-2.65) and 6 to 12 weeks (MD VAS 2.03, 95% CI 1.86-2.20). Mid-term pain relief also favored HA over comparators across indications >12 weeks from administration (MD VAS 3.57, 95% CI 3.35-3.78). High heterogeneity was present with rotator cuff (10 trials, I² = 94%), and elbow tendinopathy (2 trials, I² = 99%). We identified uncertain benefit for trigger finger (2 trials, I² = 67%). Heterogeneity for ankle sprains, patellar tendinopathy and Achilles tendinopathy could not be assessed as they only had 1 trial each.

CONCLUSION

This systematic review and meta-analysis support HA's efficacy in the treatment of a variety of soft tissue indications. Understanding the relative effects of HA to other injectable modalities requires additional, large trials.

Diagnosis and Treatment of Trigger Finger in Brazil - A Cross-Sectional Study

Objective  The present paper aims to evaluate the therapeutic planning for trigger finger by Brazilian orthopedists. Methods  This is a cross-sectional study with a population composed of participants from the 2018 Brazilian Congress on Orthopedics and Traumatology (CBOT-2018, in the Portuguese acronym), who answered a questionnaire about the conduct adopted for trigger finger diagnosis and treatment. Results  A total of 243 participants were analyzed, with an average age of 37.46 years old; most participants were male (88%), with at least 1 year of experience (55.6%) and from Southeast Brazil (68.3%). Questionnaire analysis revealed a consensus on the following issues: diagnosis based on physical examination alone (73.3%), use of the Quinnell classification modified by Green (58.4%), initial nonsurgical treatment (91.4%), infiltration of steroids combined with an anesthetic agent (61.7%), nonsurgical treatment time ranging from 1 to 3 months (52.3%), surgical treatment using the open approach (84.4%), mainly the transverse open approach (51%), triggering recurrence as the main nonsurgical complication (58%), and open surgery success in > 90% of the cases (63%), with healing intercurrences (54%) as the main complication. There was no consensus on the remaining variables. Orthopedists with different practicing times disagree on treatment duration ( p  = 0.013) and on the complication rate of open surgery ( p  = 0.010). Conclusions  Brazilian orthopedists prefer to diagnose trigger finger with physical examination alone, to classify it according to the Quinnell method modified by Green, to institute an initial nonsurgical treatment, to perform infiltrations with steroids and local anesthetic agents, to sustain the nonsurgical treatment for 1 to 3 months, and to perform the surgical treatment using a transverse open approach; in addition, they state that the main nonsurgical complication was triggering recurrence, and report open surgery success in > 90% of the cases, with healing intercurrences as the main complication.

The efficacy of hyaluronic acid for carpal tunnel syndrome: a randomized double-blind clinical trial

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the effect of hyaluronic acid (HA) in patients diagnosed with mild or moderate carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS).

DESIGN

A prospective randomized, double-blinded control study with 6 months of follow-up.

SETTING

Rehabilitation outpatient clinic of one single medical center.

SUBJECTS

Thirty-five participants with mild or moderate CTS.

METHODS

Participants were enrolled and randomly assigned to HA or control groups. The HA group received one ultrasound-guided perineural injection of 2.5 ml HA while the control group received 2.5 ml normal saline injection through in-plane, long-axis approach to separate the median nerve from the flexor retinaculum via nerve hydrodissection. Boston Carpal Tunnel Syndrome Questionnaire (BCTQ) scores were the primary outcome, while secondary outcomes included the numeric rating scale (NRS), electrophysiological domains, and the cross-sectional area of the median nerve. The assessment was conducted prior to injection and during the second week and 1-, 3-, and 6-months post-injection.

RESULTS

Thirty-two patients (17 wrists in HA group and 15 wrists in control group) completed the study. Compared with the control group, the HA group did not show significantly superior outcomes, except in BCTQ and NRS at the second week post-injection (all p < 0.0125).

CONCLUSIONS

A single ultrasound guided perineural HA injection may have short-term therapeutic efficacy for mild or moderate CTS; however, the 2-weeks superior efficacy was not beneficial for chronic neuropathy. Further studies with larger sample sizes are required to verify its therapeutic efficacy.

Efficacy Comparison of Hyaluronic Acid and Corticosteroid Injection in Treatment of Trigger Digits: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Background: Although the current nonsurgical treatment for trigger digits is corticosteroid (CS) injection, it often comes with adverse effects that may cause some limitations. Currently, Hyaluronic acid (HA) has been successfully used in tendinopathy and may be used in stenosing tenosynovitis. The aim of this study is to compare the efficacy of ultrasound-guided injection between the HA and CS in trigger digits treatment. Methods: Double-blind randomized controlled trial was conducted. Fifty patients with 66 trigger digits were randomly assigned into an intervention group (1 ml of low-molecular weight HA) and a control group (1 ml of 10mg/ml triamcinolone acetate). The ultrasound-guided injection and local anesthesia (0.5 ml of 1% lidocaine without adrenaline) were used. The Quinnell grading, Visual Analog Scale (VAS) score of pain, Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) score and complications were collected at 1-, 3-and 6-month follow-up. Results: The mean age of HA group (33 digits) and CS group (33 digits) were 58.3 years and 54.7 years respectively. Nine patients were loss of follow-up (7 in HA group and 2 in CS group). The Quinnell grades have shown an improvement in both group. The CS group had a significant better improvement at 1-month (p-value < 0.001) and there was no significant difference at 3-and 6-month follow-up between the two groups. The median of VAS and DASH score were significantly improved by time in both groups (p-value < 0.01). The CS group showed a better significant improvement in early period of follow-up (p-value < 0.05). However, there was no significant difference between the two groups in the last follow-up. Conclusions: HA and CS injection has a comparable therapeutic effect in treatment of trigger digits. However, CS injection has higher efficacy of pain and inflammation reduction in the early phase of the disease.

Comparative effectiveness of various treatment strategies for trigger finger by pairwise meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To compare the efficacy of various strategies in the treatment of trigger finger.

DATA SOURCES

A systematic literature search for randomized controlled trials to compare treatments for trigger finger was conducted through three online databases, Pubmed, Embase and Cochrane Library, from their inception dates to 22 May 2020.

METHODS

Relative risk (RR) with 95% confidence interval (CI) was used to evaluate the effect sizes in success rate for included articles.

RESULTS

Sixteen articles (n = 1185) were included in our meta-analysis. The results showed that the efficacy of steroid injection was significantly better than the placebo group at short-term follow-ups (RR = 19.00, 95% CI = 1.17-309.77 for one-week; RR = 3.70, 95% CI = 3.70, 95% CI = 1.61-8.53 for one-month), and then became non-significant at four months (RR = 3.21, 95% CI = 0.88-11.79). There was no significant difference in success rate between steroid injection and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug injection, and between open surgery and percutaneous release at all the follow-ups. Only surgical treatment had significantly better efficacy in success rate than steroid injection at all follow-ups (RR = 0.48, 95% CI = 0.34-0.66 for one-month; RR = 0.87, 95% CI = 0.80-0.96 for three-month; RR = 0.58, 95% CI = 0.48-0.68 for six-month; RR = 0.38, 95% CI = 0.20-0.72 for 12-month).

CONCLUSION

There were no differences in efficacy between steroid injection and shockwave or nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug injection. The surgical treatments had the best efficacy among these treatments.

Comparison of the clinical effectiveness of ultrasound-guided corticosteroid injection with and without needle release of the A1 pulley in treating trigger finger

OBJECTIVE

To compare the clinical effectiveness of ultrasound-guided corticosteroid injection with and without needle release of the A1 pulley in treating trigger finger.

METHODS

A total of 60 patients with trigger finger were enrolled in this retrospective study. Among them, 30 patients were treated with ultrasound-guided needle release of the A1 pulley with corticosteroid injection (group A) and 30 patients were treated with single ultrasound-guided corticosteroids injection (group B). The following parameters were evaluated including clinical parameters (pain degree, function of joint, finger tendon function, postoperative satisfaction), and ultrasound parameter (thickness of A1 pulley).

RESULTS

The postoperative visual analogue scale (VAS) and Quinnell scores in two groups were significantly lower than that before operation (p < 0.05). The postoperative Quinnell score of group A was significantly lower than that in group B (p < 0.05). The TAM results showed that the postoperative overall excellent and good rate of group A was significantly higher than that in group B (p < 0.05). The postoperative survey showed that more than 80% patients reported satisfaction in the two groups. The ultrasound imaging results showed that the postoperative thickness of A1 pulley in two groups were thinner than that before operation (p < 0.05). There were no adverse effects and complications in the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Both approaches had treatment benefit in trigger finger. Ultrasound-guided needle release of the A1 pulley with corticosteroid injection had better treatment benefits than single ultrasound-guided corticosteroids injection in improving finger tendon function and joint function.

Clinical indications for image-guided interventional procedures in the musculoskeletal system: a Delphi-based consensus paper from the European Society of Musculoskeletal Radiology (ESSR)-Part II, elbow and wrist

BACKGROUND

Although image-guided interventional procedures of the elbow and wrist are routinely performed, there is poor evidence in the literature concerning such treatments. Our aim was to perform a Delphi-based consensus on published evidence on image-guided interventional procedures around the elbow and wrist and provide clinical indications on this topic.

METHODS

A board of 45 experts in image-guided interventional musculoskeletal procedures from the European Society of Musculoskeletal Radiology were involved in this Delphi-based consensus study. All panelists reviewed and scored published papers on image-guided interventional procedures around the elbow and wrist updated to September 2018 according to the Oxford Centre for Evidence-based Medicine levels of evidence. Consensus on statements drafted by the panelists about clinical indications was considered as "strong" when more than 95% of panelists agreed and as "broad" if more than 80% agreed.

RESULTS

Eighteen statements were drafted, 12 about tendon procedures and 6 about intra-articular procedures. Only statement #15 reached the highest level of evidence (ultrasound-guided steroid wrist injections result in greater pain reduction and greater likelihood of attaining clinically important improvement). Seventeen statements received strong consensus (94%), while one received broad consensus (6%).

CONCLUSIONS

There is still poor evidence in published papers on image-guided interventional procedures around the elbow and wrist. A strong consensus has been achieved in 17/18 (94%) statements provided by the panel on clinical indications. Large prospective randomized trials are needed to better define the role of these procedures in clinical practice.

KEY POINTS

• The panel provided 18 evidence-based statements on clinical indications of image-guided interventional procedures around the elbow and wrist. • Only statement #15 reached the highest level of evidence: ultrasound-guided steroid wrist injections result in greater pain reduction and greater likelihood of attaining clinically important improvement. • Seventeen statements received strong consensus (94%), while broad consensus was obtained by 1 statement (6%).

Ultrasound Features of Trigger Finger: Review of the Literature

Trigger finger is a common pathologic condition of the digital pulleys and flexor tendons in the hand. The key clinical finding is a transient blockage of the digit when it is flexed with subsequent painful snapping when it is extended. Imaging is a helpful guide for establishing the severity of the disease, identifying the underlying cause, and deciding the appropriate management. This narrative review aims to recall the anatomic and pathologic bases and describe the ultrasound features of trigger finger, also including common ultrasound findings and complications after therapy. Ultrasound enables an accurate static and dynamic evaluation of trigger finger as well as a comparison with the adjacent normal digits and thus should be considered the radiologic modality of first choice for its diagnosis.

Ultrasound-Guided Interventional Procedures of the Wrist and Hand: Anatomy, Indications, and Techniques

Acute and chronic wrist and hand conditions are commonly seen by neuromuscular and musculoskeletal specialists. High-frequency diagnostic ultrasonography (US) has facilitated advances in the diagnosis and interventional management of wrist and hand disorders. US provides excellent soft tissue resolution, accessibility, portability, lack of ionizing radiation, and the ability to dynamically assess disorders and precisely guide interventional procedures. This article review the relevant anatomy, indications, and interventional techniques for common disorders of the wrist and hand, including radiocarpal joint arthritis, scaphotrapeziotrapezoidal joint arthritis, trapeziometacarpal joint arthritis, phalangeal joint arthritis, first dorsal compartment tenosynovitis, ganglion cysts, and stenosing tenosynovitis.