Randomised controlled trial evaluating the short-term analgesic effect of topical diclofenac on chronic Achilles tendon pain: a pilot study

Multidisciplinary Guidelines for the Rational Use of Topical Non-Steroidal Anti-Inflammatory Drugs for Musculoskeletal Pain (2022)

(1) Background: Topical non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are one of the primary drugs for treating musculoskeletal pain. However, there are currently no evidence-based recommendations about drug selection, drug administration, drug interactions, and use in special populations or other pharmacology-related content of such medications. To this end, the Chinese Pharmaceutical Association Hospital Pharmacy Professional Committee developed multidisciplinary guidelines on using topical NSAIDs to treat musculoskeletal pain. (2) Methods: The guidelines development process followed the World Health Organization guideline development handbook, the GRADE methodology, and the statement of Reporting Items for Practice Guidelines in Healthcare. The guideline panel used the Delphi method to identify six clinical questions to be addressed in the guidelines. An independent systematic review team conducted a systematic search and integration of evidence. (3) Results: Based on the balance between the benefits and harms of an intervention, the quality of the evidence, patient preferences and values, and resource utilization, the guideline panel developed 11 recommendations and nine expert consensuses on using topical NSAIDs to treat acute and chronic musculoskeletal pain. (4) Conclusions: Based on the effectiveness and overall safety of topical NSAIDs, we recommend patients with musculoskeletal pain use topical NSAIDs and suggest high-risk patients use topical NSAIDs, such as those with other diseases or receiving other concurrent treatments. The evidenced-based guidelines on topical NSAIDs for musculoskeletal pain incorporated a pharmacist perspective. The guidelines have the potential to facilitate the rational use of topical NSAIDs. The guideline panel will monitor the relevant evidence and update the recommendations accordingly.

Efficacy of low-level laser therapy in patients with lower extremity tendinopathy or plantar fasciitis: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

OBJECTIVES

We investigated the effectiveness of low-level laser therapy (LLLT) in lower extremity tendinopathy and plantar fasciitis on patient-reported pain and disability.

DESIGN

Systematic review and meta-analysis.

DATA SOURCES

Eligible articles in any language were identified through PubMed, Embase and Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro) on the 20 August 2020, references, citations and experts.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTION OF STUDIES

Only randomised controlled trials involving participants with lower extremity tendinopathy or plantar fasciitis treated with LLLT were included.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Random effects meta-analyses with dose subgroups based on the World Association for Laser Therapy treatment recommendations were conducted. Risk of bias was assessed with the PEDro scale.

RESULTS

LLLT was compared with placebo (10 trials), other interventions (5 trials) and as an add-on intervention (3 trials). The study quality was moderate to high.Overall, pain was significantly reduced by LLLT at completed therapy (13.15 mm Visual Analogue Scale (VAS; 95% CI 7.82 to 18.48)) and 4-12 weeks later (12.56 mm VAS (95% CI 5.69 to 19.42)). Overall, disability was significantly reduced by LLLT at completed therapy (Standardised Mean Difference (SMD)=0.39 (95% CI 0.09 to 0.7) and 4-9 weeks later (SMD=0.32 (95% CI 0.05 to 0.59)). Compared with placebo control, the recommended doses significantly reduced pain at completed therapy (14.98 mm VAS (95% CI 3.74 to 26.22)) and 4-8 weeks later (14.00 mm VAS (95% CI 2.81 to 25.19)). The recommended doses significantly reduced pain as an add-on to exercise therapy versus exercise therapy alone at completed therapy (18.15 mm VAS (95% CI 10.55 to 25.76)) and 4-9 weeks later (15.90 mm VAS (95% CI 2.3 to 29.51)). No adverse events were reported.

CONCLUSION

LLLT significantly reduces pain and disability in lower extremity tendinopathy and plantar fasciitis in the short and medium term. Long-term data were not available. Some uncertainty about the effect size remains due to wide CIs and lack of large trials.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42017077511.

ICON 2020-International Scientific Tendinopathy Symposium Consensus: A Systematic Review of Outcome Measures Reported in Clinical Trials of Achilles Tendinopathy

BACKGROUND

Nine core domains for tendinopathy have been identified. For Achilles tendinopathy there is large variation in outcome measures used, and how these fit into the core domains has not been investigated.

OBJECTIVE

To identify all available outcome measures outcome measures used to assess the clinical phenotype of Achilles tendinopathy in prospective studies and to map the outcomes measures into predefined health-related core domains.

DESIGN

Systematic review.

DATA SOURCES

Embase, MEDLINE (Ovid), Web of Science, CINAHL, The Cochrane Library, SPORTDiscus and Google Scholar.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES

Clinical diagnosis of Achilles tendinopathy, sample size ≥ ten participants, age ≥ 16 years, and the study design was a randomized or non-randomized clinical trial, observational cohort, single-arm intervention, or case series.

RESULTS

9376 studies were initially screened and 307 studies were finally included, totaling 13,248 participants. There were 233 (177 core domain) different outcome measures identified across all domains. For each core domain outcome measures were identified, with a range between 8 and 35 unique outcome measures utilized for each domain. The proportion of studies that included outcomes for predefined core domains ranged from 4% for the psychological factors domain to 72% for the disability domain.

CONCLUSION

233 unique outcome measures for Achilles tendinopathy were identified. Most frequently, outcome measures were used within the disability domain. Outcome measures assessing psychological factors were scarcely used. The next step in developing a core outcome set for Achilles tendinopathy is to engage patients, clinicians and researchers to reach consensus on key outcomes measures.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION

CRD42020156763.

Topical diclofenac vs placebo for the treatment of chronic Achilles tendinopathy: A randomized controlled clinical trial

INTRODUCTION

The application of topical diclofenac has been suggested as a possible treatment for Achilles tendinopathy. Our aim was to answer the question, is topical diclofenac more effective than placebo for the treatment of Achilles tendinopathy?.

METHODS

67 participants with persistent midportion or insertional Achilles tendinopathy were randomly assigned to receive a 4 week course of 10% topical diclofenac (n = 32) or placebo (n = 35). The a priori primary outcome measure was change in severity of Achilles tendinopathy (VISA-A score) at 4 and 12 weeks. Secondary outcome measures included numeric pain rating, and patient-reported change in symptoms using a 7 point scale, from substantially worse to substantially better. Pressure pain threshold (N) and transverse tendon stiffness (N/m) were measured over the site of maximum Achilles tendon pathology at baseline and 4 weeks.

RESULTS

There were no statistically or clinically significant differences between the diclofenac and placebo groups in any of the primary or secondary outcome measures at any timepoint. Average VISA-A score improved in both groups (p<0.0001), but the improvements were marginal: at 4 weeks, the improvements in VISA-A were 9 (SD 11) in the diclofenac group and 8 (SD 12) in the placebo group, and at 12 weeks the improvements were 9 (SD 16) and 11 (SD13) respectively-these average changes are smaller than the minimum clinically important difference of the VISA-A.

CONCLUSION

The regular application of topical diclofenac for Achilles tendinopathy over a 4 week period was not associated with superior clinical outcomes to that achieved with placebo.

Intramuscular stimulation vs sham needling for the treatment of chronic midportion Achilles tendinopathy: A randomized controlled clinical trial

Background

The insertion of filiform needles intramuscularly (a.k.a. intramuscular stimulation/dry needling) has been suggested as a possible treatment for various painful musculoskeletal conditions. Our aim was to answer the question, is intramuscular stimulation more effective than sham intramuscular stimulation/dry needling for the treatment of Achilles tendinopathy?

Methods

52 participants with persistent midportion Achilles tendinopathy began and 46 completed one of three treatment protocols which were randomly assigned: (G3) a 12-week rehabilitation program of progressive tendon loading plus intramuscular stimulation (n = 25), (G2) the same rehabilitation program but with sham intramuscular stimulation (n = 19), or (G1) a reference group of rehabilitation program alone (as an additional control) (n = 8). The a priori primary outcome measure was change in VISA-A score at 12 weeks–VISA-A was also measured at 6 weeks, and at 6 and 12 months. Secondary outcome measures include the proportion of patients who rated themselves as much or very much improved (%), dorsiflexion range of motion (degrees), and tendon thickness (mm).

Results

The study retention was 94% at 12 weeks and 88% at 1 year. VISA-A score improved in all three groups over time (p<0.0001), with no significant difference among the three groups in VISA-A score at the start of the study (mean ± SD: G3 59 ± 13, G2 57 ± 17, G1 56 ± 22), at 12 weeks (G3 76 ± 14, G2 76 ± 15, G1 82 ± 11) or at any other timepoint. The percentage of patients who rated themselves as much or very much improved (i.e. treatment success) was not different after 12 weeks (G3 70%, G2 89%, G1 86% p = 0.94), or at 26 (p = 0.62) or 52 weeks (p = 0.71). No clinically significant effects of intervention group were observed in any of the secondary outcome measures.

Conclusion

The addition of intramuscular stimulation to standard rehabilitation for Achilles tendinopathy did not result in any improvement over the expected clinical benefit achieved with exercise-based rehabilitation alone.

Johnson M. Pain and Function in the Runner a Ten (din) uous Link

A male runner (30 years old; 10-km time: 33 min, 46 s) had been running with suspected insertional Achilles tendinopathy (AT) for ~2 years when the pain reached a threshold that prevented running. Diagnostic ultrasound (US), prior to a high-volume stripping injection, confirmed right-sided medial insertional AT. The athlete failed to respond to injection therapy and ceased running for a period of 5 weeks. At the beginning of this period, the runner completed the Victoria institute of sports assessment–Achilles questionnaire (VISA-A), the foot and ankle disability index (FADI), and FADI sport prior to undergoing an assessment of bi-lateral gastrocnemius medialis (GM) muscle architecture (muscle thickness (MT) and pennation angle (PA); US), muscle contractile properties (maximal muscle displacement (Dm) and contraction time (Tc); Tensiomyography (TMG)) and calf endurance (40 raises/min). VISA-A and FADI scores were 59%/100% and 102/136 respectively. Compared to the left leg, the right GM had a lower MT (1.60 cm vs. 1.74 cm), a similar PA (22.0° vs. 21.0°), a lower Dm (1.2 mm vs. 2.0 mm) and Tc (16.5 ms vs. 17.7 ms). Calf endurance was higher in the right leg compared to the left (48 vs. 43 raises). The athlete began a metronome-guided (15 BPM), 12-week progressive eccentric training protocol using a weighted vest (1.5 kg increments per week), while receiving six sessions of shockwave therapy concurrently (within 5 weeks). On returning to running, the athlete kept daily pain (Numeric Rating Scale; NRS) and running scores (miles*rate of perceived exertion (RPE)). Foot and ankle function improved according to scores recorded on the VISA-A (59% vs. 97%) and FADI (102 vs. 127/136). Improvements in MT (1.60 cm vs. 1.76 cm) and PA (22.0° vs. 24.8°) were recorded via US. Improvements in Dm (1.15 mm vs. 1.69 mm) and Tc (16.5 ms vs. 15.4 ms) were recorded via TMG. Calf endurance was lower in both legs and the asymmetry between legs remained (L: 31, R: 34). Pain intensity (mean weekly NRS scores) decreased between week 1 and week 12 (6.6 vs. 2.9), while running scores increased (20 vs. 38) during the same period. The program was maintained up to week 16 at which point mean weekly NRS was 2.2 and running score was 47.

Comparison of diclofenac gel, ibuprofen gel, and ibuprofen gel with levomenthol for the topical treatment of pain associated with musculoskeletal injuries

Objective

To determine whether 3% w/w levomenthol added to ibuprofen gel (5% w/w) improves its efficacy compared with ibuprofen gel alone or diclofenac gel (1.16%) for the treatment of soft-tissue injuries.

Methods

A total of 182 patients with acute soft-tissue injuries participated in a randomised, single-blind, single-dose study to assess the efficacy and safety of three topical analgesic gels. Efficacy was assessed as the score change in a numeric rating scale for pain.

Results

The median time to significant pain relief was 20 minutes for the ibuprofen/levomenthol and diclofenac gels but 25 minutes for ibuprofen gel. At 2 hours, significantly more patients treated with ibuprofen/levomenthol gel reported a cooling sensation (45.8%) compared with diclofenac (16.4%) or ibuprofen (14.7%) gels, and both ibuprofen/levomenthol and diclofenac gels provided significantly more effective global pain relief compared with ibuprofen gel. Few adverse events and no serious adverse events related to study medication were recorded.

Conclusions

Although all gels effectively relieved pain, both ibuprofen/levomenthol and diclofenac gels provided superior global pain relief compared with ibuprofen gel, with a shorter median time to significant pain relief. Only ibuprofen/levomenthol gel provided cooling for up to 2 hours. None of the gels were associated with serious safety concerns. EudraCT No 2015-005240-33 EU Clinical Trials Register URL: https://www.clinicaltrialsregister.eu/ctr-search/search

15-Epi-LXA4 and MaR1 counter inflammation in stromal cells from patients with Achilles tendinopathy and rupture

Resolution of inflammation is poorly understood in Achilles tendon disorders. Herein, we investigated the bioactive lipid mediator profiles of tendon-derived stromal cells isolated from patients with Achilles tendinopathy (AT) or Achilles rupture (AR) under baseline and IL-1β–stimulated conditions. We also determined whether incubating these cells with 2 of the mediators produced by tendon-derived stromal cells, 15-epi-Lipoxin A₄ (15-epi-LXA₄) or maresin (MaR)-1, moderated their proinflammatory phenotype. Under baseline conditions, AT cells showed concurrent increased levels of proinflammatory eicosanoids and proresolving mediators compared with AR cells. IL-1β treatment induced profound prostaglandin E₂ release in AR compared with AT cells. Incubation of IL-1β treated AT and AR tendon-derived stromal cells in 15-epi-LXA₄ or MaR1 reduced proinflammatory eicosanoids and potentiated the release of proresolving mediators. These mediators also induced specialized proresolving mediator (SPM) biosynthetic enzymes arachidonate lipoxygenase (ALOX) 12 and ALOX15 and up-regulated the proresolving receptor ALX compared with vehicle-treated cells. Incubation in 15-epi-LXA₄ or MaR1 also moderated the proinflammatory phenotype of AT and AR cells, regulating podoplanin, CD90, signal transducer and activator of transcription (STAT)-1, IL-6, IFN regulatory factor (IRF) 5, and TLR4 and suppressed c-Jun N-terminal kinase 1/2/3, Lyn, STAT-3, and STAT-6 phosphokinase signaling. In summary, we identify proresolving mediators that are active in AT and AR and propose SPMs, including 15-epi-LXA₄ or MaR1, as a potential strategy to counterregulate inflammatory processes in these cells.—Dakin, S. G., Colas, R. A., Newton, J., Gwilym, S., Jones, N., Reid, H. A. B., Wood, S., Appleton, L., Wheway, K., Watkins, B., Dalli, J., Carr, A. J. 15-Epi-LXA₄ and MaR1 counter inflammation in stromal cells from patients with Achilles tendinopathy and rupture.

Using Pressure Massage for Achilles Tendinopathy: A Single-Blind, Randomized Controlled Trial Comparing a Novel Treatment Versus an Eccentric Exercise Protocol

Background

Eccentric exercises are the only conservative treatment that has shown good clinical results in studies of Achilles tendinopathy (AT), but success rates vary, indicating the need for alternative treatments. Soft tissue treatments are widely used for AT, but strong scientific evidence is lacking to support those treatments.

Purpose/Hypotheses

This study aimed to determine whether pressure massage to the calf muscles is a useful treatment for AT and to compare this treatment versus an eccentric exercise protocol. Our first hypothesis was that pressure massage treatment is equivalent or superior to eccentric exercises with regard to pain reduction time (ie, pain would be reduced more quickly with pressure massage). The second hypothesis was that pressure massage is equivalent or superior to eccentric exercises with regard to function of the calf muscles.

Study Design

Randomized controlled trial; Level of evidence, 1.

Methods

A total of 60 patients with AT were randomized into 3 groups: group 1 underwent an eccentric exercise protocol, group 2 underwent pressure massage, and group 3 underwent pressure massage and the eccentric exercise protocol. Patients were evaluated with the Icelandic version of the Victorian Institute of Sports Assessment-Achilles questionnaire (VISA-A-IS), an algometer to test the pressure pain threshold (PPT) of the Achilles tendon, tests for ankle range of motion (ROM), and real-time ultrasonographic (US) scanning of tendon thickness and degree of neovascularization. Measurements for VISA-A-IS, PPT, and ROM were taken at 0, 4, 8, 12, and 24 weeks. US scan measurements were taken at 0, 12, and 24 weeks. Mixed-model analysis of variance was used for statistical analysis.

Results

All groups improved when evaluated with VISA-A-IS scores (P < .0001). The pressure massage group improved significantly more than the eccentric exercise group at week 4, which was the only between-group difference. Ankle ROM increased significantly over time (ROM bent knee P = .006 and ROM straight knee P = .034), but no significant difference was found between groups. No significant difference was found in evaluations of PPT or US scan measurements.

Conclusion

Pressure massage is a useful treatment for Achilles tendinopathy. Compared with eccentric exercise treatment, pressure massage gives similar results. Combining the treatments did not improve the outcome.