Arthroscopic release for frozen shoulder: Does the timing of intervention and diabetes affect outcome?

The S2e Guideline on Shoulder Stiffness

The clinical picture of "frozen shoulder" is still poorly understood. In order to present the current state of knowledge on aetiology, diagnosis, and treatment, and to provide recommendations for the professional groups involved, a working group was formed by the DGOU and the DVSE to create a German language, evidence-based guideline, which was published in 2022 by the AWMF. The following summarises the development and the most important results.

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.

Combined arthroscopic release with corticosteroid hydrodilatation versus corticosteroid hydrodilatation only in treating freezing-phase primary frozen shoulder: a randomized clinical trial

BACKGROUND

There has been no ideal treatment for freezing-phase frozen shoulder to rapidly relieve pain and improve joint mobility. No any other team directly compared the effectiveness of combination of arthroscopic release and corticosteroid hydrodilatation with corticosteroid hydrodilatation only in treatment of freezing-phase frozen shoulder.

METHODS

Seventy-two patients with freezing-phase frozen shoulder were randomly assigned to combined arthroscopic release with corticosteroid hydrodilatation (group A) or corticosteroid hydrodilatation only (group B). Clinical states were examined at baseline and periodically (Weeks 1, 4, 12, 24 and 1 year) after intervention by passive ROM; visual analog scale (VAS); UCLA and Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (DASH) score.

RESULTS

The passive ROM, VAS, UCLA and DASH scores always improved along the time points (all p < 0.01). The passive abduction (pAB), passive forward flexion (pFL), passive external rotation (pER), passive internal rotation (pIR) were better in group A than in group B at Week 1, 4, 12, 24 (all p < 0.01). At 1 year post-operation, the pFL and pIR were better in group A than in group B (all p < 0.01). VAS scores of group A were similar with those of group B (all p > 0.01), the differences between group A and group B were all lower than minimal clinically important difference (MCID). At Week 12, the UCLA sores and DASH scores were 26.8 ± 3.8, 14.2 ± 2.0 in group A versus 22.3 ± 3.4, 22.5 ± 3.1 in group B (all p < 0.01). At Week 24 post-operation, there were 32.7 ± 2.0, 9.8 ± 1.5 in group A versus 26.3 ± 3.6, 17.5 ± 3.5 in group B (all p < 0.01). At 1 year post-operation, there were 34.5 ± 0.8, 1.7 ± 1.5 in group A versus 32.1 ± 2.3, 8.8 ± 2.8 in group B (all p < 0.01), the differences of UCLA scores between group A and group B at Week 24 was higher than the MCID. There were no complications such as infection, nerve or vascular injury.

CONCLUSIONS

Combined arthroscopic release with corticosteroid hydrodilatation would yield better results in passive ROM and function than corticosteroid hydrodilatation only.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ChiCTR1900024235, July 2, 2019 (Retrospectively registered).

Influence of diabetes on response to ultrasound guided hydrodistension treatment of adhesive capsulitis: a retrospective study

BACKGROUND

Diabetes is associated with microvascular and macrovascular complications. Although it is less recognized, diabetes also has an important role in the development of musculoskeletal disorders. Our objective was to evaluate the effect of type 2 diabetes (T2D) on the severity of adhesive capsulitis of the shoulder (AC) and on the efficacy of ultrasound guided hydrodistension treatment.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective longitudinal observational study, of patients with AC who underwent ultrasound guided hydrodistension at our Centre. Severity was measured with DASH (Disabilities of Arm, Shoulder and Hand) score and pain was evaluated with a score between 0 and 10. The association of T2D with baseline characteristics of AC, and with outcomes at 6-12 months was analyzed using linear and logistic regression models.

RESULTS

We evaluated 120 ultrasound guided hydrodistension treatments of AC, 85 in patients without diabetes and 35 in patients with T2D. Patients with diabetes had a higher prevalence of dyslipidemia, hypertension and higher HbA1c values. The average duration of diabetes was 4.8 years (2.0, 7.9). The baseline characteristics of AC were not significantly different between patients with and without diabetes. Patients with T2D relapsed more frequently and required more reinterventions than patients without diabetes (20.0% vs 4.7%, p = 0.008), had higher post-intervention pain scale values [4.0 (0.0-5.0) vs 0.0 (0.0-5.0), p = 0.022] and higher post-intervention DASH score [0.8 (0.0-1.8) vs 0.0 (0.0-0.8), p = 0.038].

CONCLUSION

Although baseline characteristics of AC in patients with diabetes were similar to those without diabetes, patients with diabetes had a worse response to treatment, more frequent relapses and a greater need for new interventions.

Surgical versus Nonsurgical Multimodality Treatment in an Idiopathic Frozen Shoulder: A Retrospective Study of Clinical and Functional Outcomes

This retrospective study compared the clinical and functional outcomes of patients diagnosed with an idiopathic frozen shoulder with symptom onset of a maximum of six months, treated by arthroscopic capsular release followed by corticosteroid injection and physiotherapy to patients who received only corticosteroid injection followed by physiotherapy. The patients who underwent arthroscopic capsular release, intraoperative corticosteroid injection, and physiotherapy (Group I, n = 30) or received only corticosteroids injection and physiotherapy (Group II, n = 29) were examined in terms of shoulder range of motion (ROM), pain intensity, and function before a given treatment and three, six, and twelve months later. The groups were comparable pre-treatment in terms of ROM, pain, and functional outcome. Group I had statistically and clinically significantly better ROM and function at three and six months post-treatment than Group II. Despite being statistically significant, the between-group differences at twelve-month follow-up in ROM and function were too small to be considered clinically notable. The between-group comparison of pain revealed no significant differences at any post-treatment point of time. The early arthroscopic capsular release preceding corticosteroid injection and physiotherapy seemed more effective at three- and six-month follow-up; however, it brought a comparable result to corticosteroid injection and subsequent physiotherapy at twelve months follow-up.

Clinical Guidelines in the Management of Frozen Shoulder: An Update!

Among all the prevalent painful conditions of the shoulder, frozen shoulder remains one of the most debated and ill-understood conditions. It is a condition often associated with diabetes and thyroid dysfunction, and which should always be investigated in patients with a primary stiff shoulder. Though the duration of 'traditional clinicopathological staging' of frozen shoulder is not constant and varies with the intervention(s), the classification certainly helps the clinician in planning the treatment of frozen shoulder at various stages. Most patients respond very well to combination of conservative treatment resulting in gradual resolution of symptoms in 12-18 months. However, the most effective treatment in isolation is uncertain. Currently, resistant cases that do not respond to conservative treatment for 6-9 months could be offered surgical treatment as either arthroscopic capsular release or manipulation under anaesthesia. Though both invasive options are not clinically superior to another, but manipulation could result in unwarranted complications like fractures of humerus or rotator cuff tear.

Current concepts of natural course and in management of frozen shoulder: A clinical overview

Frozen Shoulder (FS) by many specialists is still considered a benign, self-limiting condition, which usually resolves without intervention. This concept originated in the 70’, stating that FS will proceed from “the freezing” phase, with the predominance of inflammation and pain to “the frozen” phase with marked stiffness in the joint and “the thawing” phase, with a progressive return to the normal Range Of Motion (ROM) and function. Nevertheless, numerous authors have recently challenged this concept, arguing that most patients with FS will never fully recover, and suffer from residual pain and loss of function. Lack of early intervention, when a patient does not improve with conservative treatment, might lead to disability. We have discussed the recent concepts in the natural course of the disease and discussed both noninvasive and surgical methods in the treatment of FS.