Ultrasound Evaluation of the Greater Trochanter Pain Syndrome: Bursitis or Tendinopathy?

The EFSUMB Guidelines and Recommendations for Musculoskeletal Ultrasound - Part I: Extraarticular Pathologies

The first part of the guidelines and recommendations for musculoskeletal ultrasound, produced under the auspices of the European Federation of Societies for Ultrasound in Medicine and Biology (EFSUMB), provides information about the use of musculoskeletal ultrasound for assessing extraarticular structures (muscles, tendons, entheses, ligaments, bones, bursae, fasciae, nerves, skin, subcutaneous tissues, and nails) and their pathologies. Clinical applications, practical points, limitations, and artifacts are described and discussed for every structure. After an extensive literature review, the recommendations have been developed according to the Oxford Centre for Evidence-based Medicine and GRADE criteria and the consensus level was established through a Delphi process. The document is intended to guide clinical users in their daily practice.

Ultrasound Definitions and Findings in Greater Trochanteric Pain Syndrome: A Systematic Review

Ultrasound (US) assists in the determination of the pathology underlying greater trochanteric pain syndrome (GTPS); however, there exists no consensus regarding the US criteria used to define these pathologies. We aim to explore these US definitions and their associated prevalence. "Trochanteric bursitis" was defined in 10 studies (13 included studies) and was heterogeneously described. "Tendinopathy" was defined in 4 studies, while 7 studies defined "tendinosis." "Tendon tears" were defined in 8 studies, 6 of which distinguished between "partial- and full-thickness tears." Tendon pathology was most frequent in 5 studies (prevalence: 7%-93%), and bursitis in 2 studies (prevalence: 10%-75%); 3 studies had equal distribution. Methodological quality was limited in the descriptions of GTPS and US approaches. Together, we document the lack of standardized US definitions of the pathologies underlying GTPS. This may explain the heterogenous prevalence of US findings. Standardized definitions are needed to improve the reliability of future GTPS studies.

Do features of central sensitisation exist in Greater Trochanteric Pain Syndrome (GTPS)? A case control study

BACKGROUND

Greater Trochanteric Pain Syndrome (GTPS), which is commonly due to Gluteal Tendinopathy, refers to pain over the lateral hip that can become persistent and disabling. Central nervous sensitisation has been implicated in upper limb tendinopathy, but no studies have investigated if it plays a role in GTPS.

OBJECTIVES

To investigate if features of central sensitisation were present in people with GTPS.

METHODS

Eighteen people with GTPS were matched with 18 healthy controls in this cross-sectional study. The VISA-G and Central Sensitisation Inventory (CSI) self-report questionnaires were completed and pressure pain detection thresholds (PPDTs) at local and remote sites were measured in all participants. Data were analysed for between-group differences using Mann-Whitney U tests. Correlation between CSI and PPDTs were assessed using Pearson correlation co-efficients.

RESULTS

PPDT values were lower at local (symptomatic greater trochanter) and remote sites in the GTPS group, indicative of central sensitisation, resulting in statistically significant between-group differences. 44.4% of the GTPS group were classified as having symptoms of central sensitisation, based on the CSI.

CONCLUSION

There is preliminary evidence of central sensitisation in people with GTPS. Results need to be validated using other objective quantitative sensory testing measures in larger samples.

Isometric versus isotonic exercise for greater trochanteric pain syndrome: a randomised controlled pilot study

Objectives

Greater trochanteric pain syndrome (GTPS) is a common cause of lateral hip pain. Limited evidence exists for the effectiveness of exercise for GTPS. This study aimed to compare the effectiveness of isometric and isotonic exercise for individuals with GTPS.

Methods

This randomised controlled pilot trial recruited 30 participants with GTPS. Both programmes consisted of daily, progressive home exercise for 12 weeks with 8 individual physiotherapy sessions over the trial period. The primary outcome measure was the Victorian Institute of Sport Assessment-Gluteal (VISA-G) and secondary outcome measures included the Numeric Pain Rating Scale (0–10) and an 11-point Global Rating of Change Scale. Outcome measures were assessed at baseline, 4 and 12 weeks.

Results

Twenty-three participants completed the trial. After 12 weeks, mean VISA-G scores improved in both groups; 55–65 in the isometric group and 62–72 in the isotonic group. 55% of the isometric group and 58% of the isotonic group achieved a reduction in pain of at least 2 points (minimally clinically important difference (MCID)) on the Numeric Pain Rating Scale. 64% of the isometric group and 75% of the isotonic group had improved by at least 2 points (MCID) on the Global Rating of Change Scale.

Conclusion

Isometric and isotonic exercise programmes appear to be effective for individuals with GTPS and should be considered in the loading management of patients with this condition.