Comparison Between Anterior and Posterior Approaches for Ultrasound-Guided Glenohumeral Steroid Injection in Primary Adhesive Capsulitis: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Targeting the Sweet Spot: A Systematic Review With Meta-Analysis of Anterior Versus Posterior Glenohumeral Joint Injections for Adhesive Capsulitis

OBJECTIVE

To compare clinical outcomes following steroid injections using the anterior and posterior approaches.

DESIGN

Systematic review with meta-analysis.

SETTING

Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Center Register of Controlled Trials were searched for randomized control trials (RCTs) and prospective comparative studies.

PATIENTS

Patients with adhesive capsulitis.

INTERVENTIONS

Glenohumeral steroid injections using either anterior or posterior approach.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Pain visual analog scale (VAS) and shoulder range of motion (ROM) at 12 weeks, accuracy, and adverse events. Standardized mean difference (SMD) for VAS and weighted mean difference (WMD) for ROMs.

RESULTS

We identified 6 RCTs and one prospective comparative study with a total of 468 patients. While there was no difference in pain VAS at 12 weeks between the 2 approaches (SMD, -0.86; 95% CI, -1.76 to 0.04), the anterior approach resulted in greater improvements in external rotation (WMD, 8.08; 95% CI, 0.79-15.38) and abduction (WMD, 6.76; 95% CI, 3.05-10.48) compared with the posterior approach. Subgroup analysis with RCTs that utilized steroid injection with hydrodilatation for both approaches demonstrated greater reduction in pain VAS at 12 weeks with the anterior approach (SMD, -0.52; 95% CI, -0.98 to -0.07). Overall, procedures were well tolerated without major complications.

CONCLUSIONS

While pain reduction is similar, the anterior approach may be more beneficial in restoring shoulder external rotation and abduction compared with the posterior approach at 12 weeks. Steroid injection combined with hydrodilatation may further improve pain control when performed with the anterior approach at 12 weeks.

Corticosteroid Injection Methods for Frozen Shoulder: A Network Meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the efficacy of corticosteroid (CS) injection methods for frozen shoulder.

DATA SOURCES

PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library were searched up to May 6, 2023.

STUDY SELECTION

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that investigated CS injection methods for frozen shoulder were included.

DATA EXTRACTION

Data were extracted independently by 2 authors. Risk of bias was assessed using the RoB 2 tool.

DATA SYNTHESIS

A random-effects network meta-analysis was performed within a frequentist framework. The certainty of evidence was evaluated using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations approach. A total of 66 RCTs involving 4491 patients were included. For short-term outcomes, 4-site injection (vs placebo [PLA]: standardized mean difference [SMD]=-2.20, 95% confidence interval [CI], -2.81 to -1.59 in pain; SMD=2.02; 95% CI, 1.39-2.65 in global function) was the most effective (low certainty). Rotator interval injection was the optimal treatment with moderate to high certainty (vs PLA: SMD=-1.07, 95% CI, -1.51 to -0.64 in pain; SMD=0.94, 95% CI, 0.49-1.40 in global function). For midterm outcomes, 4-site injection was most effective (vs PLA: SMD=-1.71, 95% CI, -2.41 to -1.01 in pain; SMD=2.22, 95% CI, 1.34-3.09 in global function; low certainty). Distension via rotator interval (D-RI) was the optimal treatment with moderate to high certainty (vs PLA: SMD=-1.10, 95% CI, -1.69 to -0.51 in pain; SMD=1.46, 95% CI, 0.73-2.20 in global function). Distension and intra-articular injection via anterior or posterior approaches produced effects equivalent to those of rotator interval injection and D-RI.

CONCLUSIONS

Rotator interval injection, distension, and intra-articular injection had equivalent effects on symptom relief. More RCTs are required to validate the superiority of multisite injections.

Image-guided glucocorticoid injection versus injection without image guidance for shoulder pain

BACKGROUND

Despite widespread use, our 2012 Cochrane review did not confirm that use of imaging to guide glucocorticoid injection for people with shoulder pain improves its efficacy.

OBJECTIVES

To update our review and assess the benefits and harms of image-guided glucocorticoid injection compared to non-image-guided injection for patients with shoulder pain.

SEARCH METHODS

We updated the search of the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, via Ovid), MEDLINE (Ovid), Embase (Ovid) and clinicaltrials.gov to 15 Feb 2021, and the World Health Organisation International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (http://www.who.int/trialsearch/Default.aspx) to 06 July 2020. We also screened reference lists of retrieved review articles and trials to identify potentially relevant studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials that compared image-guided glucocorticoid injection to injection without image guidance (either landmark-guided or intramuscular) injection in patients with shoulder pain (rotator cuff disease, adhesive capsulitis or mixed or undefined shoulder pain). Major outcomes were pain, function, proportion of participants with treatment success, quality of life, adverse events, serious adverse events and withdrawals due to adverse events. Minor outcomes were shoulder range of motion and proportion of participants requiring surgery or additional injections. There were no restrictions on language or date of publication.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodologic procedures expected by Cochrane.

MAIN RESULTS

Nineteen trials were included (1035 participants). Fourteen trials included participants with rotator cuff disease, four with adhesive capsulitis, and one with mixed or undefined shoulder pain. Trial size varied from 28 to 256 participants, most participants were female, mean age ranged between 31 and 60 years, and mean symptom duration varied from 2 to 23 months. Two trials were at low risk of bias for all criteria. The most notable sources of bias in the remaining trials included performance bias and detection bias. Moderate-certainty evidence (downgraded for bias) indicates that ultrasound-guided injection probably provides little or no clinically important benefits compared with injection without guidance with respect to pain (15 trials) or function (14 trials) at three to six weeks follow-up. It may not improve quality of life (2 trials, low-certainty evidence, downgraded due to potential for bias and imprecision) and we are uncertain about the effect of ultrasound-guided injection on participant-rated treatment success due to very low-certainty evidence (downgraded for bias, inconsistency and imprecision). Mean pain (scale range 0 to 10, higher scores indicate more pain) was 3.1 points with injection without image guidance and 0.5 points better (0.2 points better to 0.8 points better; 1003 participants, 15 trials) with an ultrasound-guided injection. This represents a slight difference for pain (0.5 to 1.0 points on a 0 to 10 scale). Mean function (scale range 0 to 100, higher scores indicate better function) was 68 points with injection without image guidance and 2.4 points better (0.2 points worse to 5.1 points better; 895 participants, 14 trials) with an ultrasound-guided injection. Mean quality of life (scale range 0 to 100, higher scores indicate better quality of life) was 65 with injection without image guidance and 2.8 points better (0.7 worse to 6.4 better; 220 participants, 2 trials) with an ultrasound-guided injection. In five trials (350 participants), 101/175 (or 606 per 1000) people in the ultrasound-guided group reported treatment success compared with 68/175 (or 389 per 1000) people in the group injected without image guidance (RR 1.56 (95% CI 0.89 to 2.75)), an absolute difference of 22% more reported success (4% fewer to 62% more). Low-certainty evidence (downgraded for bias and imprecision) indicates that ultrasound-guided injections may not reduce the risk of adverse events compared to injections without image guidance. In five trials (402 participants), 38/200 (or 181 per 1000) people in the ultrasound-guided group reported adverse events compared with 51/202 (or 252 per 1000) in the non-image-guided injection group (RR 0.72 (95% CI 0.4 to 1.28)), an absolute difference of 7% fewer adverse events (15% fewer to 7% more). Five trials reported that there were no serious adverse events. The remaining trials did not report serious adverse events. One trial reported that 1/53 (or 19 per 1000) in the injection without image guidance group and 0/53 in the ultrasound-guided group withdrew due to adverse events. Sensitivity analyses indicate that the effects for pain and function may have been influenced by selection bias, and the effects for function may have been influenced by detection bias. The test for subgroup differences indicated there were unlikely to be differences in pain and function across different shoulder conditions.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Our updated review does not support use of image guidance for injections in the shoulder. Moderate-certainty evidence indicates that ultrasound-guided injection in the treatment of shoulder pain probably provides little or no benefit over injection without imaging in terms of pain or function and low-certainty evidence indicates there may be no difference in quality of life. We are uncertain if ultrasound-guided injection improves participant-rated treatment success, due to very low-certainty evidence. Low-certainty evidence also suggests ultrasound-guided injection may not reduce the risk of adverse events compared with non-image-guided injection. No serious adverse events were reported in any trial. The lack of significant benefit of image guidance over injection without image guidance to improve patient-relevant outcomes or reduce harms, suggests that any added cost of image guidance appears unjustified.

Efficacy of Arthroscopic Surgery in the Management of Adhesive Capsulitis: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

PURPOSE

To determine which interventions optimize clinical outcomes in adhesive capsulitis by performing a network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

METHODS

A systematic review was conducted of all clinical trials on adhesive capsulitis published since 2008. Patient cohorts were grouped into treatment categories; data collected included range of motion (ROM) and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). Interventions were compared across groups by means of arm-based Bayesian network meta-analysis in a random-effects model.

RESULTS

Sixty-six studies comprising 4042 shoulders (57.6% female patients, age 54.8 ± 3.2 years [mean ± standard deviation]) were included. The most commonly studied interventions were physical therapy (PT) or shoulder injections. Network meta-analysis demonstrated that arthroscopic surgical capsular release was the most effective treatment in increasing ROM. This effect was apparent in forward flexion (effect difference [ED] versus placebo, 44°, 95% confidence interval [CI] 31° to 58°), abduction (ED 58°, 45° to 71°), internal rotation (ED 34°, 24° to 44°), and external rotation (ED 59°, 37° to 80°). Interventions most effective for pain relief included PT supplemented with either medical therapy (ED -4.50, -9.80 to 2.80) or ultrasound therapy (ED -5.10, -5.10 to -1.40). Interventions most effective for improvement of functional status included PT, manipulation under anesthesia (MUA), intra-articular or subacromial steroid injection, surgical capsular release, and supplementation of PT with alternative therapy.

CONCLUSIONS

No one treatment emerged superior in regard to ROM, pain symptoms, and functional status. Surgery (after failure of conservative treatment) ranked highest across all ROM domains. Treatments that ranked highest for treatment of pain included PT supplemented with either medical therapy or ultrasound. Finally, treatments that ranked highest for improvements in functional status included MUA, PT with medical therapy, surgical intervention, PT with ultrasound, PT with injection, and injection alone.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

II, systematic review and network meta-analysis of level I and II studies.

Treatment of Primary Shoulder Stiffness: Results of a Survey on Surgeon Practice Patterns in Italy

Objectives  Shoulder stiffness is a condition of restricted glenohumeral range of motion (ROM), which can arise spontaneously or as consequence of a known cause. Several treatment options are available and currently no consensus has been obtained on which treatment algorithm represents the best choice for the patient. The aim of this study was to investigate surgeon practice patterns in Italy regarding treatment of primary shoulder stiffness.

Methods  A literature review was performed to identify randomized controlled trials reporting results of shoulder stiffness treatment. The following controversial or critical points in the treatment of primary shoulder stiffness were identified: modalities of physical therapy; indication for oral corticosteroid; indication and frequency for injective corticosteroid; technique and site of injection; and indication, timing, and technique for surgery. A survey composed by 14 questions was created and administrated to the members of a national association specialized in orthopaedics and sports traumatology (SIGASCOT at the time of survey completion, recently renamed SIAGASCOT after the fusion of the societies SIGASCOT and SIA).

Results  A total of 204 completed questionnaires were collected. Physical therapy was recommended by 98% of the interviewed. The use of oral corticosteroids was considered by 51%, and injections of corticosteroids by 72%. The posterior injection approach was the one preferred and a number of three was considered the upper limit for repeated injections. Injective therapy with local anesthetics and hyaluronic acid was considered by more than 20% of the interviewed. Thirty percent of the interviewed did not treat shoulder stiffness surgically.

Conclusion  Several approaches to shoulder stiffness have been proposed and high-level evidence is available to analyze and discuss their results. Several controversial points emerged both from a literature review and from this national survey. Treatment of shoulder stiffness should be tailored to the patient's clinical situation and the stage of its pathology and should aim at pain reduction, ROM restoration, functional regain, and shortening of symptoms duration, with conservative therapy remaining the mainstay of treatment.

Ultrasound-guided interventions for painful shoulder: from anatomy to evidence

Shoulder pain is a common musculoskeletal disorder of variable etiology, ranging from rotator cuff pathology to peripheral nerve entrapment. Advances in ultrasound (US) technology have allowed static and dynamic evaluation of shoulder problems and most importantly, offer real-time, radiation-free guidance for interventions. The present review aims to describe shoulder anatomy in detail using information from cadaveric models and to illustrate US-guided techniques using clearly labeled figures and videos. The review will also present evidence of specific US-guided therapies for shoulder pain by summarizing landmark studies, systematic reviews, and meta-analyses. The following shoulder structures will be covered: 1) the biceps long head tendon, 2) the acromioclavicular joint, 3) the subacromial-subdeltoid bursa, 4) the glenohumeral joint, 5) the suprascapular nerve, and 6) the axillary nerve.

Clinical characteristics of patients with posterosuperior labral tear: a comparison with patients with other shoulder disorders

Background

Among the various causes of shoulder pain, the glenoid labral tear is likely to be overlooked due to its ambiguous symptoms, especially if clinicians do not have a prior suspicion, making it difficult to diagnose, unlike adhesive capsulitis or a rotator cuff tear. Therefore, the aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical features of posterosuperior (PS) labral tear.

Methods

Of the patients who visited the clinic, the medical records of patients with shoulder pain who underwent shoulder magnetic resonance imaging or ultrasound after intra-articular injection (arthrosonography) were investigated retrospectively. Based on these criteria, a total of 120 patients with adhesive capsulitis, rotator cuff problem, or PS labral tear were included for analysis in this study.

Results

In the physical examination, all patients with a PS labral tear were positive on the O’Brien test (13/13, 100%) and the external rotation (ER) test with the upper arm in the abduction position (abduction and ER [ABER] test) (13/13, 100%), but they were negative on other tests, such as the Hawkins–Kennedy (1/13, 7.69%) and Neer (0/13, 0.00%) tests. Except one patient, all patients with a PS labral tear were negative on the ER test with the upper arm in the neutral position (ER test) (1/13, 7.69%). In the clinical history, all patients with a PS labral tear had a characteristic episode of shoulder pain occurring in the excessive ABER posture.

Conclusion

In patients with characteristic physical findings (no definite loss of motion of the shoulder joint, negative in an ER test, but positive in an ABER test and O’Brien test), and with a clinical history of PS labral tear (a history of pain occurring with the excessive ABER posture), clinicians need to have a suspicion of PS labral tear and to identify the PS labral tear using MRI or arthrosonography

Comparative outcomes of combined corticosteroid with low volume compared to high volume of local anesthetic in subacromial injection for impingement syndrome: systematic review and meta-analysis of RCTs

Subacromial impingement syndrome (SIS) is one of the most frequent pathologies of the shoulder, which may cause serious restriction of daily activities and lifestyle changes. Corticosteroid injection (CI) into the subacromial space is a palliative treatment option. Currently, there have been no studies that compare between the different volumes of CI injection. We have conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to answer our specific study questions: Are high volume (< 5 ml) better than low volume (≥ 5 ml) of CI injection with respect to pain reduction? This systematic review was conducted according to the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses guidelines. Relevant studies were identified from Medline and Scopus from inception to May 11, 2017 that reported American shoulder and elbow surgeons (ASES) function score, pain visual analog score (VAS), and postoperative complications of either group. Fifteen studies were included for the analysis of high volume (more than or equal 5 ml), and 5 studies were included for analysis of low volume (less than 5 ml). Overall, there were 1101 patients (732 in the high-volume group and 369 in the low-volume group). A pooling of mean VAS and ASES function score was (N = 557) 2.02 (95% CI 1.52, 2.53), (N = 190) 82.59 (95% CI 76.92, 88.27) in high-volume group and (N = 179) 2.60 (95% CI 1.94, 3.26), (N = 95) 84.65 (95% CI 81.64, 86.82) in low-volume group, respectively. The unstandardized mean difference of ASES and VAS of high volume was - 0.58 (95% confidence interval (CI): - 1.38, 0.22) and - 2.06 (95% CI - 8.35, 4.23) scores lower than low-volume CI in SIS patients, but without statistical significance. A total of 11 studies in the high-volume group and 4 studies in the low-volume group reported adverse effects. The total complication rate per patient was 6.2% (2.3, 10.1%) in the high-volume group and 11.7% (0.3, 12%) in the low-volume group (p = 0.091). No significant differences were noted for complications. In subacromial impingement syndrome, the corticosteroid injection had acceptable pain and functional outcomes. Higher volume had a lower ASES, VAS, and risk of having complication when compared to lower volume. However, there are no statistically significant differences between groups. Larger, randomized noninferiority or equivalent trial studies are needed to confirm these findings as the current literature is still insufficient. Level of evidence I.