Arthroscopic capsular release and manipulation under anaesthesia for frozen shoulders: A hot topic

Arthroscopic Capsular Release Versus Manipulation under Anesthesia for Refractory Frozen Shoulder: A Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis

OBJECTIVE

Frozen shoulder (FS) is a painful and debilitating condition affecting the shoulder joint. When patients fail to improve after conservative treatments, operative treatments including arthroscopic capsular release (ACR) and manipulation under anesthesia (MUA) are recommended. However, the comparison between these two interventions remains controversial. This study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of ACR and MUA for refractory FS.

METHODS

A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science were searched for eligible studies until December 10, 2023. Meta-analyses were conducted using Manager V.5.3.3. Pooled effect sizes were expressed as the weighted mean difference (WMD) or odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs).

RESULTS

A total of eight comparative studies with 768 patients were included. Compared with MUA, ACR had statistically better Δ VAS (WMD, -0.44; 95% CI, -0.71 to -0.18; I2 = 6%; p = 0.001) at over 12-month follow-up, which did not reach the minimal clinically important difference (MCID). Other outcomes regarding pain relief, function, and range of motion (ROM) improvements were not statistically different between the two groups at different follow-up timepoints. Compared with the MUA group, the ACR group had a significantly higher rate of severe complications (OR, 4.14; 95% CI, 1.01 to 16.94; I2 = 0%; p = 0.05), but comparable rates of mild complications and additional intervention.

CONCLUSIONS

In treating refractory FS, ACR demonstrated comparable pain relief, functional and ROM improvements, rates of mild complications and additional intervention but a higher risk of severe complications to MUA during short-term follow-up periods. Notably, ACR exhibited statistically superior improvement in the long-term pain relief compared to the MUA group, although it did not reach the MCID.

Comparing surgical outcomes of anterior capsular release vs circumferential release for persistent capsular stiffness

Purpose

To consolidate the existing literature evaluating anterior capsular release and circumferential capsular release in the treatment of adhesive capsulitis (AC) of the shoulder.

Methods

The electronic databases PUBMED, EMBASE, MEDLINE and CENTRAL (Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials) were searched from data inception to October 8, 2020. Data are presented descriptively where appropriate. A meta-analysis was conducted for patient-reported outcomes.

Results

Overall, there were forty-six articles included. The majority of patients underwent circumferential release compared to anterior release (80.1% vs. 19.9%). Concomitant Manipulation Under Anesthesia (MUA) was employed in 25 studies, with a higher occurrence in the anterior compared to the circumferential release group (70% vs 60%). Both groups experienced significant improvements postoperatively in range of motion (ROM) and patient-reported outcomes. Complication rates were low for both anterior release (0.67%) and 360° release (0.44%).

Conclusion

Both anterior and circumferential release are effective techniques for treating AC with low complication rates. Future studies should improve documentation of patient demographics, surgical techniques and outcomes to determine an individualized treatment protocol for patients.

Level of evidence

Level IV, Systematic Review of Level I-IV studies.