Autologous blood and corticosteroid injection and extracoporeal shock wave therapy in the treatment of lateral epicondylitis

Lateral elbow magnetic resonance imaging findings in patients without pain complaints

Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) can help evaluate lateral epicondylitis; however, abnormal findings on MRI are not always consistent with the symptoms. The occurrence of such abnormal MRI findings at the lateral side of the elbow in patients without pain remains unclear. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to investigate the MRI findings of the lateral elbow joint in patients with no complaints of pain in the elbow joint. We retrospectively identified 152 patients who had undergone MRI of the area including the elbow from July 2015 to January 2022. We excluded patients with pain in the elbow area and those with diagnosis of diseases that could affect MRI findings at the lateral elbow. The presence of lateral collateral ligament complex (LCLC) and common extensor tendon (CET) lesions on MRI was assessed by two reviewers. In total, 22 patients (12 men and 10 women) were included in the analysis. The mean age of the patients was 54 years. Five patients, all ≥65 years old, had abnormal findings related to the LCLC or CET on MRI. Abnormal LCLC and CET findings on MRI can be encountered in older patients even in the absence of elbow pain.

Comparing autologous blood, corticosteroid, and a combined injection of both for treating lateral epicondylitis: a randomized clinical trial

BACKGROUND

Because lateral epicondylitis is a common musculoskeletal disorder that affects the forearm's extensor tendons, an effective therapeutic approach should reverse the degeneration and promote regeneration. This study aimed to compare the efficacies of autologous blood (AB) injection, corticosteroid (CS) injection, and a combined injection of both in treating lateral epicondylitis (LE), hypothesizing that the combined approach might offer immediate symptom resolution and a lower recurrence.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 120 patients diagnosed with lateral epicondylitis were systematically distributed among three distinct therapeutic injection groups. Those in the AB group were administered 1 ml of autologous venous blood mixed with 2 ml of 2% prilocaine HCl. Participants in the CS category were given 1 ml of 40 mg methylprednisolone acetate mixed with 2 ml of 2% prilocaine HCl. Meanwhile, patients in the combined group received a mixture containing 1 ml each of autologous venous blood and 40 mg methylprednisolone acetate along with 1 ml of 2% prilocaine HCl. Prior to receiving their respective injections, a comprehensive assessment of all participants was carried out. Follow-up assessments were subsequently conducted on days 15, 30, and 90 utilizing metrics of the patient-rated tennis elbow evaluation (PRTEE) and measurements of hand grip strength (HGS).

RESULTS

One patient dropped out from the combined group, and 119 patients completed the trial. No complications were recorded during the course of follow-up. By day 15, all groups had demonstrated significant PRTEE improvement, with CS showing the most pronounced reduction (p = 0.001). However, the benefits of CS had deteriorated by day 30 and had deteriorated further by day 90. The AB and AB + CS groups demonstrated sustained improvement, with AB + CS revealing the most effective treatment, achieving a clinically significant improvement in 97.4% of the patients. The improved HGS parallelled the functional enhancements, as it was more substantial in the AB and AB + CS groups (p = 0.001), corroborating the sustained benefits of these treatments.

CONCLUSIONS

The study concluded that while AB and CS individually offer distinct benefits, a combined AB + CS approach optimizes therapeutic outcomes, providing swift and sustained functional improvement with a lower recurrence rate. These findings have substantial clinical implications, suggesting a balanced, multimodal treatment strategy for enhanced patient recovery in LE.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Randomized clinical trial, level 1 evidence.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT06236178.

Extracorporeal Shock Wave Therapy for the Treatment of Musculoskeletal Pain: A Narrative Review

Extracorporeal shock waves are high-intensity mechanical waves (500-1000 bar) of a microsecond duration with a morphology characterized by a rapid positive phase followed by a negative phase.

BACKGROUND

Extracorporeal shock waves have been used for pain treatment for various sub-acute and chronic musculoskeletal (MSK) problems since 2000. The aim of this article is to update information on the role of extracorporeal shock wave therapy (ESWT) in the treatment of various pathologies that cause MSK pain.

METHODS

Given that in the last two years, articles of interest (including systematic reviews and meta-analyses) have been published on less known indications, such as low back pain, nerve entrapments, osteoarthritis and bone vascular diseases, a literature search was conducted in PubMed, the Cochrane Database, EMBASE, CINAHL and PEDro, with the aim of developing a narrative review of the current literature on this topic. The purposes of the review were to review possible new mechanisms of action, update the level of evidence for known indications and assess possible new indications that have emerged in recent years.

RESULTS

Although extracorporeal shock waves have mechanical effects, their main mechanism of action is biological, through a phenomenon called mechanotransduction. There is solid evidence that supports their use to improve pain in many MSK pathologies, such as different tendinopathies (epicondylar, trochanteric, patellar, Achilles or calcific shoulder), plantar fasciitis, axial pain (myofascial, lumbar or coccygodynia), osteoarthritis and bone lesions (delayed union, osteonecrosis of the femoral head, Kienbock's disease, bone marrow edema syndrome of the hip, pubis osteitis or carpal tunnel syndrome). Of the clinical indications mentioned in this review, five have a level of evidence of 1+, eight have a level of evidence of 1-, one indication has a level of evidence of 2- and two indications have a level of evidence of 3.

CONCLUSIONS

The current literature shows that ESWT is a safe treatment, with hardly any adverse effects reported. Furthermore, it can be used alone or in conjunction with other physical therapies such as eccentric strengthening exercises or static stretching, which can enhance its therapeutic effect.

Effects of splinting and three injection therapies (corticosteroid, autologous blood and prolotherapy) on pain, grip strength, and functionality in patients with lateral epicondylitis

Objectives

This study aims to compare the efficacy of the wrist splint and the injection of corticosteroid, autologous blood, and hypertonic dextrose in the treatment of lateral epicondylitis (LE).

Patients and methods

A total of 120 patients (43 males, 77 females; mean age: 45.7±7.7 years; range, 18 to 65 years) diagnosed with LE between December 2013 and June 2015 were included in the study and randomized into four groups. The first group was administered 20 mg methylprednisolone acetate + 2 mL 2% prilocaine, the second group 2 mL venous blood + 0.5 mL prilocaine, and the third group 2 mL 30% dextrose + 0.5 mL prilocaine injections. A second injection was administered to the third group one month later. The fourth group was recommended to use only a wrist splint. Pre-treatment and post-treatment evaluations of the patients were carried out at one and six months by the Visual Analog Scale (VAS) in terms of pain, by Patient-Rated Tennis Elbow Evaluation (PRTEE) questionnaire in terms of functional level, and by the Jamar dynamometer in terms of grip strength.

Results

In all groups, VAS values at one and six months after treatment were found to be lower in comparison to baseline. Except for the splint group, a significant improvement was observed in all three injection groups in terms of grip strength and PRTEE values at six months compared to the baseline values. In the comparison of the groups, no significant difference was observed in terms of improvement in VAS scores and grip strength. While corticosteroid injection was significantly effective in terms of PRTEE pain, function, and total scores only at one month, the autologous injection was effective in terms of PRTEE function and total scores at only six months after treatment. There were no significant differences for splint and prolotherapy groups in terms of PRTEE scores.

Conclusion

Corticosteroid injection, autologous blood injection, and prolotherapy are effective and safe long-term methods in LE treatment.

Platelet-rich plasma therapy ensures pain reduction in the management of lateral epicondylitis - a PRISMA-compliant network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

OBJECTIVES

Analyze the effectiveness of PRP therapy in comparison to other available treatments in the management of lateral epicondylitis (LE).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We conducted electronic database searches in PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library until June 2021 for RCTs analyzing the efficacy of PRP in the management of LE. VAS for pain, DASH score, and PRETEE score were the outcomes analyzed. The analysis was performed in R-platform using MetaInsight and interventions were ranked based on p-score approach. Cochrane's CINeMA approach was used for quality appraisal.

RESULTS

Twenty-five RCTs with 2040 patients were included in the network analysis. Compared to saline control, only leukocyte-rich-PRP resulted in significant pain relief (WMD=-14.8,95% CI [-23.18,-6.39];low confidence) compared to steroid, local anesthetic, laser, and surgery. On analyzing DASH scores and PRETEE scores, none of the above-mentioned treatment methods were superior to saline control. In subgroup analysis, leucocyte-rich-PRP resulted in clinically significant improvement. Leucocyte-rich-PRP seems more promising with p-score of 0.415.

CONCLUSION

PRP therapy offers significant pain relief compared to saline control in the management of LE without similar improvement in functional outcome. With available low-quality evidence, PRP was the most promising therapy that needs further exploration to explore its usefulness in lateral epicondylitis.

Extracorporeal shock wave therapy (ESWT) versus local corticosteroid injection in treatment of lateral epicondylitis (tennis elbow) in athletes: clinical and ultrasonographic evaluation

Background

Lateral epicondylitis is one of the commonly noticed disorders of the arm described by agony focused over lateral epicondyle which is the site of wrist extensors origin. The purpose of this work was to compare the efficiency of extracorporeal shock wave therapy and local corticoid injection in management of lateral epicondylitis both clinically and ultrasonographically as well as to assess the role of ultrasound in diagnosis and follow-up of lateral epicondylitis. This study was performed on 30 athletes diagnosed as lateral epicondylitis.

Results

Both corticosteroid injection and shock wave treatment showed a highly significant effectiveness on pain by visual analog scale (VAS). A highly significant difference between before treatment and after 2 as well as 4 weeks of treatment regarding the functional disability parameters as patient-rated tennis elbow evaluation (PRTEE) and quick disabilities of the arm, shoulder, and hand (DASH) was found. Likewise, a statistically significant improvement in favor of shock wave therapy group after 2 weeks was found, inversely insignificant difference after 8 and 12 weeks regarding to VAS occurred. Both PRTEE and Quick DASH test showed a statistically significant difference among groups through all follow-up period.

There was a statistically insignificant difference among the studied groups according to ultrasound (US) changes in the form of focal areas of hypo-echogenicity through follow-up periods. A significant improvement in favor of ESWT group is detected among the studied groups regarding tendon thickening in ultrasonography before treatment and after 2 and 4 weeks. However, the difference was insignificant after 8 and 12 weeks.

Conclusions

Both corticosteroid local injection and shock wave therapy are helpful and effective for lateral epicondylitis treatment. However, a shock wave therapy revealed better improvement on long-term clinical and ultrasonogrphic follow-up than corticosteroid injection. Musculoskeletal ultrasound represents a helpful diagnostic and follow-up tool for lateral epicondylitis.

Autologous blood and platelet-rich plasma injection therapy for lateral elbow pain

BACKGROUND

Autologous whole blood or platelet-rich plasma (PRP) injections are commonly used to treat lateral elbow pain (also known as tennis elbow or lateral epicondylitis or epicondylalgia). Based on animal models and observational studies, these injections may modulate tendon injury healing, but randomised controlled trials have reported inconsistent results regarding benefit for people with lateral elbow pain.

OBJECTIVES

To review current evidence on the benefit and safety of autologous whole blood or platelet-rich plasma (PRP) injection for treatment of people with lateral elbow pain.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and Embase for published trials, and Clinicaltrials.gov and the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) search portal for ongoing trials, on 18 September 2020.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs comparing autologous whole blood or PRP injection therapy to another therapy (placebo or active treatment, including non-pharmacological therapies, and comparison between PRP and autologous blood) for lateral elbow pain. The primary comparison was PRP versus placebo. Major outcomes were pain relief (≥ 30% or ≥ 50%), mean pain, mean function, treatment success, quality of life, withdrawal due to adverse events, and adverse events; the primary time point was three months.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 32 studies with 2337 participants; 56% of participants were female, mean age varied between 36 and 53 years, and mean duration of symptoms ranged from 1 to 22 months. Seven trials had three intervention arms. Ten trials compared autologous blood or PRP injection to placebo injection (primary comparison). Fifteen trials compared autologous blood or PRP injection to glucocorticoid injection. Four studies compared autologous blood to PRP. Two trials compared autologous blood or PRP injection plus tennis elbow strap and exercise versus tennis elbow strap and exercise alone. Two trials compared PRP injection to surgery, and one trial compared PRP injection and dry needling to dry needling alone. Other comparisons include autologous blood versus extracorporeal shock wave therapy; PRP versus arthroscopic surgery; PRP versus laser; and autologous blood versus polidocanol. Most studies were at risk of selection, performance, and detection biases, mainly due to inadequate allocation concealment and lack of participant blinding. We found moderate-certainty evidence (downgraded for bias) to show that autologous blood or PRP injection probably does not provide clinically significant improvement in pain or function compared with placebo injection at three months. Further, low-certainty evidence (downgraded for bias and imprecision) suggests that PRP may not increase risk for adverse events. We are uncertain whether autologous blood or PRP injection improves treatment success (downgraded for bias, imprecision, and indirectness) or withdrawals due to adverse events (downgraded for bias and twice for imprecision). No studies measured health-related quality of life, and no studies reported pain relief (> 30% or 50%) at three months. At three months, mean pain was 3.7 points (0 to 10; 0 is best) with placebo and 0.16 points better (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.60 better to 0.29 worse; 8 studies, 523 participants) with autologous blood or PRP injection, for absolute improvement of 1.6% better (6% better to 3% worse). At three months, mean function was 27.5 points (0 to 100; 0 is best) with placebo and 1.86 points better (95% CI 4.9 better to 1.25 worse; 8 studies, 502 participants) with autologous blood or PRP injection, for absolute benefit of 1.9% (5% better to 1% worse), and treatment success was 121 out of 185 (65%) with placebo versus 125 out of 187 (67%) with autologous blood or PRP injection (risk ratio (RR) 1.00; 95% CI 0.83 to 1.19; 4 studies, 372 participants), for absolute improvement of 0% (11.1% lower to 12.4% higher). Regarding harm, we found very low-certainty evidence to suggest that we are uncertain whether withdrawal rates due to adverse events differed. Low-certainty evidence suggests that autologous blood or PRP injection may not increase adverse events compared with placebo injection. Withdrawal due to adverse events occurred in 3 out of 39 (8%) participants treated with placebo versus 1 out of 41 (2%) treated with autologous blood or PRP injection (RR 0.32, 95% CI 0.03 to 2.92; 1 study), for an absolute difference of 5.2% fewer (7.5% fewer to 14.8% more). Adverse event rates were 35 out of 208 (17%) with placebo versus 41 out of 217 (19%) with autologous blood or PRP injection (RR 1.14, 95% CI 0.76 to 1.72; 5 studies; 425 participants), for an absolute difference of 2.4% more (4% fewer to 12% more). At six and twelve months, no clinically important benefit for mean pain or function was observed with autologous blood or PRP injection compared with placebo injection.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Data in this review do not support the use of autologous blood or PRP injection for treatment of lateral elbow pain. These injections probably provide little or no clinically important benefit for pain or function (moderate-certainty evidence), and it is uncertain (very low-certainty evidence) whether they improve treatment success and pain relief > 50%, or increase withdrawal due to adverse events. Although risk for harm may not be increased compared with placebo injection (low-certainty evidence), injection therapies cause pain and carry a small risk of infection. With no evidence of benefit, the costs and risks are not justified.

Extracorporeal shockwave treatment in knee osteoarthritis: therapeutic effects and possible mechanism

Osteoarthritis (OA), the most common degenerative joint disease, is characterized by the cardinal symptoms of chronic pain and restricted joint activity. The complicated pathological changes associated with OA and unclear mechanistic etiology have rendered existing non-surgical OA management options unsatisfactory. Increasing clinical and experimental evidence suggests that extracorporeal shockwave therapy (ESWT) is beneficial in OA treatment. ESWT is found to have modifying effects on cartilage and subchondral bone alterations in OA progression, as well as the clinical complaints of patients, including chronic pain and limited joint activities. However, the specific treatment strategy regarding the dosage and frequency of ESWT is still underdetermined. This review discusses the existing evidence regarding the therapeutic indications and possible mechanism of ESWT for OA treatment.

[Poor results and complications in the use of focused shockwaves and radial pressure waves in musculoskeletal pathology]

The application of focused shockwaves and radial pressure waves in musculoskeletal pathology has had a great development in the last decade. Although most of the publications have highlighted their safety and efficacy, poor results and complications can occur. This review analyzes the main causes of its poor results, adverse effects, and complications, emphasizing their prevention.

Clinical effectiveness of shockwave therapy in lateral elbow tendinopathy: systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the effectiveness of extracorporeal shockwave therapy compared with other interventions on pain, grip strength and disability in patients with lateral elbow tendinopathy.

DATA SOURCES

MEDLINE, PubMed, CINAHL, EMBASE, PEDro, ScienceDirect, Cochrane Library and clinical trial registries.

REVIEW METHODS

We included randomized controlled trials assessing the effectiveness of extracorporeal shockwave therapy alone or as an additive intervention compared with sham or other interventions. Pain intensity, grip strength and elbow disability were used as primary outcome measures. We assessed methodological quality with the PEDro score and quality of evidence with the GRADE approach.

RESULTS

Twenty-seven studies with 1871 patients were finally included. Extracorporeal shockwave therapy reduced pain intensity at mid-term follow-up (standardized mean difference: -1.21, 95% confidence interval:-1.53, -0.89, P < 0.001) and improved grip strength at very short- (mean difference:3.92, 95% confidence interval: 0.91, 6.94, P = 0.01) and short-term follow-up (mean difference:4.87, 95% confidence interval:2.24, 7.50, P < 0.001) compared with sham treatment. However, no clinically significant results were found between comparators in all outcomes and follow-up times. Extracorporeal shockwave therapy presented clinically better compared to Laser in grip strength at short-term (mean difference:3.50, 95% confidence interval:2.40, 4.60, P < 0.001) and ultrasound in pain intensity at very-short-term follow-up (standardized mean difference: -1.54, 95% confidence interval: -2.60, -0.48, P = 0.005).

CONCLUSION

Low to moderate certainty of evidence suggests that there are no clinical benefits of extracorporeal shockwave therapy compared to sham interventions or corticosteroid injections. Based on very-low and moderate certainty of evidence, extracorporeal shockwave therapy outperforms against Laser and ultrasound, respectively.Level of Evidence: Therapy, level 1a.

Ultrasound Measurements of the ECRB Tendon Shows Remarkable Variations in Patients with Lateral Epicondylitis

Background

Lateral epicondylitis (LE) most commonly affects the Extensor Carpi Radialis Brevis (ECRB) tendon and patients are generally treated with injection therapy. For optimal positioning of the injection, as well as an estimation of the surface area and content of the ECRB tendon to determine the volume of the injectable needed, it is important to know the exact location of the ECRB in relation to the skin as well as the variation in tendon length and location. The aim of this study was to determine the variation in location and size of the ECRB tendon in patients with LE.

Methods

An observational sonographic evaluation of the ECRB tendon was performed in 40 patients with LE. The length of the ECRB tendon, distance from the cutis to the center of the ECRB tendon, the length of the osteotendinous junction at the epicondyle and the distance from cutis to middle of the osteotendinous junction were measured.

Results

The average tendon length was 1.68cm (range 1.27-1.98; SD 0.177). Compared to women, the ECRB tendon of men was on average 0.12cm longer. Overall, the average distance from cutis to the center of the ECRB was 0.75cm (range 0.50-1.46cm; SD 0.210), the average length of the junction was 0.55cm (range 0.35-0.87; SD 0.130), and the distance from cutis to middle of the osteotendinous junction was 0.73cm (range 0.40-1.25cm; SD 0.210).

Conclusion

The size and depth of the ECRB tendon in patients with LE is largely variable. While there are no studies yet suggesting sono-guided injection to be superior to that of blind injection, the anatomic variability of this study suggests that the accuracy of injection therapy for LE might be compromised when based solely on bony landmarks and therefore not fully reliable. As a result, there is value in further studies exploring the accuracy of the ultrasound guided injection techniques.

Efficacy of Extracorporeal Shock Wave Therapy for Lateral Epicondylitis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background

Lateral epicondylitis (LE) is a common elbow problem. Extracorporeal shock wave therapy (ESWT) was widely used in the treatment of LE and has been shown to relieve the pain and functional impairment (loss of grip strength) caused by tennis elbow. However, the evidence with regard to whether ESWT has better clinical efficacy over other method is not clear. The aim of the study was to compare the effectiveness of ESWT with other techniques in the treatment of LE.

Methods

Literature searches of PubMed, OVID, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science were searched up to 30^th June, 2019. Only RCTs comparing ESWT with other methods for LE were included. Data collection and extraction, quality assessment, and data analyses were performed according to the Cochrane standards.

Results

A total of 13 articles with 1035 patients were included. Of which, 501 underwent ESWT and 534 underwent other methods. The result of meta-analysis showed that pooled VAS (P = 0.0004) and grip strength (P < 0.00001) were better in the ESWT group.

Conclusion

Based on the existing clinical evidence, extracorporeal shock wave therapy can effectively relieve the pain and functional impairment (loss of grip strength) caused by tennis elbow, with better overall safety than several other methods. However, owing to the limited quality and quantity of the included studies, more high-quality RCTs are needed to support the trend towards better functional outcomes with ESWT.

Platelet-Rich Plasma Vs Autologous Blood Vs Corticosteroid Injections in the Treatment of Lateral Epicondylitis: A Systematic Review, Pairwise and Network Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Objective

To compare the effectiveness of platelet‐rich plasma (PRP), autologous blood (AB), and corticosteroid injections in patients with lateral epicondylitis.

Type of Study

Network meta‐analysis.

Literature Survey

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared any two forms of injections among PRP, AB, and corticosteroid for the treatment of lateral epicondylitis were searched from inception to 30 November 2018, on PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane library.

Methodology

Two researchers independently selected and assessed the quality of RCTs with the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool. All relevant data from the included studies were extracted and heterogeneity was checked by Cochran's Q test and inconsistency statistic (I²). Publication bias was evaluated by constructing contour‐enhanced funnel plots. Stata 15 software was applied for pairwise meta‐analysis and network meta‐analysis. To explore the efficacy between different follow‐up periods, we considered the duration within 2 months to be short term, whereas 2 months or more was considered long term.

Synthesis

Twenty RCTs (n = 1271) were included in this network meta‐analysis. According to ranking probabilities, corticosteroid ranked first for visual analog score (VAS) (surface under the cumulative ranking [SUCRA] = 90.7), modified Nirschl score (82.9), maximum grip strength (69.5), modified Mayo score (MMS) (77.9), and Patient‐Related Tennis Elbow Evaluation (PRTEE) score (93.3) for the short‐term period. For the long‐term period, PRP ranked first for VAS (94.3), pressure pain threshold (99.8), Disabilities of Arm Shoulder and Hand (DASH) score (75.2), MMS (88.2), and the PRTEE score (81.8).

Conclusion

PRP was associated with more improvement in pain intensity and function in the long term than were the comparators. However, in the short term, corticosteroids were associated with the most improvement.

Shock-wave therapy versus corticosteroid injection on lateral epicondylitis: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Background: Shock-wave (SW) therapy has been widely promoted and proven to be effective in ameliorating symptoms of lateral epicondylitis (LE) during recent years. Corticosteroid (CS) injection is another common treatment of LE, and several researches have documented its significant effect in the treatment of LE. Despite this, few studies have focused on comparing the use of SW and CS in the treatment of LE. The aim of this meta-analysis is to assess whether SW is superior to CS in managing LE, both in terms of ameliorating pain and improving functionality. Methods: A systematic search of the literature was conducted to identify relevant articles that were published in Pubmed, Medline, Embase, the Cochrane Library, SpringerLink, Clinical Trials.gov and OVID from the databases' inception to December 2018. All studies comparing the efficacy of SW and CS in terms of pain levels and functionality improvement were included. Data on the two primary outcomes were collected and analyzed using the Review Manager 5.3. Results: Four studies were included in the current meta-analysis. A significant difference in VAS score (SMD = 1.13, Cl 0.72-1.55 P < 0.00001, I² = 0) was noted between the SW group and the CS group. Furthermore, Significant difference was also seen in the term of grip strength (including HGS and GSS scoring system) (SMD = -1.42, Cl -1.85--0.98 P < 0.00001, I² = 0). Conclusions: In light of the better improvement in the terms of VAS and grip strength with follow-up more than 12 weeks, we assume that SW may be a superior alternative for the treatment of LE.

First clinical experience with a new injectable recombinant human collagen scaffold combined with autologous platelet-rich plasma for the treatment of lateral epicondylar tendinopathy (tennis elbow)

BACKGROUND

Lateral epicondylitis is a tendinopathy of the common extensor origin at the elbow. When traditional conservative treatment fails, more effective therapies are needed. Vergenix Soft Tissue Repair (STR) Matrix (CollPlant Ltd., Ness-Ziona, Israel) is an injectable gel composed of cross-linked bioengineered recombinant human type I collagen combined with autologous platelet-rich plasma (STR/PRP). The complex forms a collagen-fibrin matrix that promotes cell migration and tissue repair. Based on positive outcomes from preclinical trials, this study is the first clinical trial of STR/PRP on tendinopathy. We hypothesized that STR/PRP would be a safe and effective treatment for lateral epicondylar tendinopathy.

METHODS

Patients with chronic lateral epicondylitis underwent treatment with STR/PRP. Outcome assessment included grip strength, functional disability, and changes in sonographic tendon appearance for up to 6 months after treatment.

RESULTS

The study enrolled 40 patients. No systemic or local severe adverse events were reported. Clinical evaluation revealed an improvement in the mean Patient-Rated Tennis Elbow Evaluation score from 64.8 before treatment and showed a 59% reduction at 6 months. The 12-Item Short-Form Health Survey questionnaire showed improvement from a mean score of 30.7 to 37.7 at the final follow-up. Grip strength increased from 28.8 kg at baseline to 36.8 kg at 6 months. Improvements in sonographic tendon appearance were evident among 68% of patients.

CONCLUSION

STR/PRP is a safe treatment that effectively induces clinically significant improvements in elbow symptoms and general well-being as well as objective measures of strength and imaging of the common extensor tendon within 6 months of treatment of elbow tendinopathy recalcitrant to standard treatments.

Comparison of extracorporeal shock-wave therapy and wrist-extensor splint application in the treatment of lateral epicondylitis: a prospective randomized controlled study

Background

Extracorporeal shock-wave therapy (ESWT) and wrist-extensor splints (WESs) are two commonly used methods in the treatment of lateral epicondylitis. In this study, the efficacy of these two methods was compared.

Methods

The study was planned as a prospective randomized controlled study. A total of 67 patients were enrolled. The patients were divided into two groups: group 1 received ESWT (32 patients) and group 2 received WES (35 patients). Patients in group 1 underwent four sessions of ESWT once every week. In each session, an ESWT device at 10–12 Hz, 2,000 pulses, and 1.6–1.8 bar pressure was used. Patients in group 2 used a wrist splint, holding the wrist at 30°–45° extension for 4 weeks. Patients were assessed for handgrip strength, pain at rest, pain while working, and quality of life. Data were collected before and after treatment (at weeks 4, 12, and 24). A visual analog scale was used to evaluate pain at rest and while working, a hand dynamometer for handgrip strength, subscales of the SF36 Health Survey to evaluate quality of life, and the Turkish version of the patient-rated tennis-elbow evaluation was used to evaluate functioning of the affected arm during various daily life activities.

Results

In both ESWT and WES groups, although there were considerably significant improvements (P<0.001) in the parameters evaluated (pain at rest and while working, handgrip strength, Patient-Rated Tennis Elbow Evaluation, Nirschl score, and SF36 subscales) were observed at 4, 12, and 24 weeks compared to pretreatment values, there was no statistically significant difference between the two groups in terms of our evaluation parameters at the three time points (P>0.05).

Conclusion

Both ESWT and WES applications were found to yield significantly superior results when compared to pretreatment values. In comparison of the two groups, on the other hand, there was no statistically significant difference.

The Short Term Effects of Shock-Wave Therapy for Tennis Elbow: a Clinical Trial Study

BACKGROUND

Tennis elbow is one of the most often diagnosed pathology of the upper extremity and different treatments have been suggested for this disease, so this study was to investigate the effects of extracorporeal shock wave therapy in Tennis elbow treatment.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We design a before and after clinical trial study (registry number: IRCT2012072610405N1) and investigated 40 patients with tennis elbow disease. All patients received 2000 pulses extracorporeal shock wave by piezoelectric device (WOLF Company) daily for one-week. The severity of pain was the primary outcome and measured with visual analogue scale (VAS). Secondary outcome was the ability to perform daily activities using questionnaire's quick DASH (Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand). Primary and secondary outcomes at baseline, 30 and 60 days after intervention were measured.

RESULTS

The mean age of patients was 43.80±8.97 years and 28 patients (70%) were female. The mean duration of disease was 6.5 ± 7.9 month. The mean score of VAS pain score reduced from 7.25±1.54cm (median=7cm) before treatment to 2.76±2.08cm (median=2cm) at 60 days after the end of treatment (P<0.001). The Quick Dash score reduced significantly from 25.20±5.31 (median=25) before treatment to 8.69±8.32 (median=6) at 60 days after the treatment (P<0.001).

CONCLUSION

For newly diagnosed patients with tennis elbow, extracorporeal shock wave therapy can reduce the severity of pain and improve daily activity.

A review of the cellular and molecular effects of extracorporeal shockwave therapy

Extracorporeal shockwave therapy (ESWT) is a novel therapeutic modality and its use in promoting connective tissue repair and analgesic effect has been advocated in the literature. It is convenient, cost-effective, and has negligible complications; it therefore bypasses many of the problems associated with surgical interventions. This paper reviews the proposed mechanisms of action in promoting tissue repair and regeneration as well as analysing its efficacy providing an analgesic effect in clinical applications. Further research will be required to not only identify the underlying mechanisms more precisely, but will also be critical for ensuring consistency across the literature so that the most beneficial treatment protocol can be developed. Extracorporeal shockwave therapy stands as a promising alternative modality in promoting tissue repair.

Autologous Blood and Platelet-Rich Plasma Injections for Treatment of Lateral Epicondylitis

Lateral epicondylitis (tennis elbow) is a frequent cause of elbow pain; most patients (80%-90%) are successfully treated with standard nonoperative methods (rest, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, bracing, and physical therapy). Autologous blood injections and platelet-rich plasma injections are the two most frequently used orthobiologic techniques in the treatment of lateral epicondylitis. Studies of the effectiveness of autologous blood injections and platelet-rich plasma report varying outcomes, some citing significant clinical relief and others reporting no beneficial effect. More research is needed to determine how to best use orthobiologics in the treatment of lateral epicondylitis.

USG-guided injection of corticosteroid for lateral epicondylitis does not improve clinical outcomes: a prospective randomised study

BACKGROUND

Corticosteroid injection used to be the treatment of choice for lateral epicondylitis. Most injections are performed blindly. In the blinded technique, it could be difficult to determine the exact pathological localisation. The purpose of this single-blinded, randomised controlled clinical study was to compare the clinical therapeutic effects of blinded and USG-guided corticosteroid injection therapy in lateral epicondylitis.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Forty patients with chronic lateral epicondylitis were included in this clinical trial. The patients were randomly allocated to blinded group or USG-guided injection group according to a computer-generated randomisation list. All blinded injections were administered by an orthopaedic surgeon and all ultrasound-guided injections were made by a radiologist experienced in this technique. All patients were injected under aseptic conditions using 40 mg/2 mL methylprednisolone acetate. The outcomes of both treatments were assessed by an independent assessor at pre-injection, then at 6-week and 3- and 6-month follow-up assessments. The assessor evaluated the q-DASH, VAS, and grip strength scores.

RESULTS

No statistically significant difference was determined between the groups in respect of the Q-DASH and grip strength scores preoperatively and at 6 weeks and 3 and 6 months post-injection. No statistically significant difference was determined between the groups in respect of the VAS scores preoperatively and at 6 weeks and 6 months. No systemic or local complications were reported during the treatment.

CONCLUSION

There was no statistically significant difference compared to the blinded injection technique, and the mean score differences between the groups are of no clinical relevance.

Comparison of corticosteroid, autologous blood or sclerosant injections for chronic tennis elbow

OBJECTIVES

To compare three different ultrasound-guided injections for chronic tennis elbow.

DESIGN

Assessor-blinded, randomized controlled comparative trial.

METHODS

44 patients with clinically diagnosed tennis elbow, confirmed by Doppler ultrasound, received under ultrasound guidance, a single corticosteroid injection (n=14), or two injections (separated by 4 weeks) of either autologous blood (n=14) or polidocanol (n=16). Clinical and ultrasound examination was performed at baseline, 4, 12 and 26 weeks.

RESULTS

Complete recovery or much improvement was greater for corticosteroid injection than autologous blood and polidocanol at 4 weeks (p<0.001, number needed to treat 1 (95% CI 1-2)). In contrast, at 26 weeks corticosteroid was significantly worse than polidocanol (p=0.004, number needed to harm 2 (1-6)). Recurrence after corticosteroid injection was significantly higher than autologous blood or polidocanol (p=0.007, number needed to harm 2 (1-4)). Corticosteroid injection produced greater reduction in tendon thickness and vascularity than autologous blood at 4 weeks only. Compared to autologous blood, polidocanol reduced tendon thickness at 4 and 12 weeks and reduced echogenicity and hyperaemia after 12 or 26 weeks respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Injections of corticosteroid cannot be recommended over polidocanol or autologous blood, because despite beneficial short-term effect there were inferior long-term effects. Whether polidocanol or autologous blood injections are effective is unknown, especially as their global effect profiles are not unlike previously reported for wait-and-see.

The Effectiveness of Platelet-Rich Plasma in the Treatment of Tendinopathy: A Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Clinical Trials

BACKGROUND

Tendinopathy is very common in the general population. There are increasing numbers of clinical studies referring to platelet-rich plasma (PRP) and platelet-poor plasma (PPP) as treatments for tendinopathy.

PURPOSE

To perform a meta-analysis of the outcomes of the PRP groups by preparation method and injection technique in tendinopathy. To determine the clinical effectiveness of the preparations and to evaluate the effect of controls used in the studies reviewed.

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic review and meta-analysis.

METHODS

The PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, and Medline databases were searched in March 2012, April 2014, and August 2015, and randomized controlled trials using autologous blood, PRP, PPP, or autologous conditioned plasma in tendinopathy with outcome measures of pain and follow-up time of 3 months were included in this review. Trials including surgery, tendon tears, and muscle or ligament injuries were excluded. Study quality was assessed using the Cochrane Collaboration risk-of-bias tool by 2 reviewers. Data were pooled using random-effects meta-analysis. The primary outcome measure was a change in pain intensity. Where more than 1 pain scale was included, a functional score was selected ahead of a visual analog scale score.

RESULTS

A total of 18 studies (1066 participants) were included. Eight studies were deemed to be at low risk of bias. The most significant outcomes in the PRP groups were seen in those treated with highly cellular leukocyte-rich PRP (LR-PRP) preparations: GPS kit (standardized mean difference [SMD], 35.75; 95% CI, 28.40-43.10), MyCells kit (SMD, 31.84; 95% CI, 17.56-46.13), Prosys kit (SMD, 42.99; 95% CI, 37.73-48.25), and unspecified LR-PRP (SMD, 34.62; 95% CI, 31.69-37.55). When the LR-PRP system types were grouped, there was a strongly positive effect (SMD, 36.38; 95% CI, 34.00-38.77) when compared with leukocyte-poor PRP (SMD, 26.77; 95% CI, 18.31-35.22). In assessing the control groups, there was no clear difference between different types of control injections: saline (SMD, 14.62; 95% CI, 10.74-18.50), local anesthetic (SMD, 15.00; 95% CI, 7.66-22.34), corticosteroid (SMD, 23.82; 95% CI, 10.74-18.50), or dry needling (SMD, 25.22; 95% CI, 21.27-29.16).

CONCLUSION

There is good evidence to support the use of a single injection of LR-PRP under ultrasound guidance in tendinopathy. Both the preparation and intratendinous injection technique of PRP appear to be of great clinical significance.

Autologous whole blood or corticosteroid injections for the treatment of epicondylopathy and plantar fasciopathy? A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

OBJECTIVES

To compare the efficacy of autologous whole blood with that of corticosteroid injections on epicondylopathy and plantar fasciopathy.

DESIGN

Systematic review and meta-analysis.

METHODS

The databases of PubMed, Web of Science, CENTRAL, and Scopus were searched up to 6th May 2015. Randomized trials comparing the effects of autologous whole blood and corticosteroid injections on epicondylopathy or plantar fasciopathy were included. Trials exploring the efficacy of platelet-rich plasma were excluded. The primary outcome was pain relief. The secondary outcome included the assessment of composite outcomes. All outcomes were assessed at 2-6 (short-term) weeks, 8-13 (intermediate-term) weeks and 24-26 (medium-term) weeks. Quality assessment was performed with the Cochrane risk of bias tool.

RESULTS

Nine trials were included. For pain relief, there was a statistically significant difference in favour of corticosteroids in the short term (SMD 0.52; 95%CIs 0.18 to 0.86; I² = 53%; p < 0.01). A statistically significant difference in favour of autologous whole blood was indicated in the medium-term assessment of pain relief on epicondylopathy.

CONCLUSIONS

Corticosteroids were marginally superior to autologous whole blood in relieving pain on plantar fasciopathy at 2-6 weeks. Autologous whole blood provided significant clinical relief on epicondylopathy at 8-24 weeks. Conclusions were limited by the risk of bias.

Musculoskeletal (MSK) and Sport and Exercise Medicine (SEM) in General Practice (GP): A Novel GP-based MSK and SEM Clinic for Managing Musculoskeletal symptoms in a GP

Musculoskeletal (MSK) complaints are common within primary care (1) (2) (3) but some General Practitioners (GPs)/family physicians do not feel comfortable managing these symptoms (3), preferring to refer onto hospital specialists or Integrated Clinical Assessment and Treatment Services (ICATs). Long waiting times for hospital outpatient reviews are a major cause of patient inconvenience and complaints (4). We therefore aimed to establish a GP-ran MSK and sport and exercise medicine (SEM) clinic based within a Belfast GP surgery that would contribute to a sustainable improvement in managing these common conditions within primary care as well as reducing waiting times for patients with these conditions to see a specialist. This shift from hospital-based to community-based management is in-keeping with recent policy changes within the UK health-system, including Transforming Your Care within Northern Ireland (NI) (5). The GP-ran MSK and SEM clinic was held monthly within a Belfast GP practice, staffed by one GP with a specialist interest in MSK and SEM conditions and its performance was reviewed over a three month period. Parameters audited included cases seen, orthopaedic and x-ray referral rates and secondary care referrals comparing the GP practice's performance to the same time period in the previous year as well as patient satisfaction questionnaires.

What is the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of conservative interventions for tendinopathy? An overview of systematic reviews of clinical effectiveness and systematic review of economic evaluations

BACKGROUND

Lateral elbow tendinopathy (LET) is a common complaint causing characteristic pain in the lateral elbow and upper forearm, and tenderness of the forearm extensor muscles. It is thought to be an overuse injury and can have a major impact on the patient's social and professional life. The condition is challenging to treat and prone to recurrent episodes. The average duration of a typical episode ranges from 6 to 24 months, with most (89%) reporting recovery by 1 year.

OBJECTIVES

This systematic review aims to summarise the evidence concerning the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of conservative interventions for LET.

DATA SOURCES

A comprehensive search was conducted from database inception to 2012 in a range of databases including MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane Databases.

METHODS AND OUTCOMES

We conducted an overview of systematic reviews to summarise the current evidence concerning the clinical effectiveness and a systematic review for the cost-effectiveness of conservative interventions for LET. We identified additional randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that could contribute further evidence to existing systematic reviews. We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, Allied and Complementary Medicine Database, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Web of Science, The Cochrane Library and other important databases from inception to January 2013.

RESULTS

A total of 29 systematic reviews published since 2003 matched our inclusion criteria. These were quality appraised using the Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR) checklist; five were considered high quality and evaluated using a Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach. A total of 36 RCTs were identified that were not included in a systematic review and 29 RCTs were identified that had only been evaluated in an included systematic review of intermediate/low quality. These were then mapped to existing systematic reviews where further evidence could provide updates. Two economic evaluations were identified.

LIMITATIONS

The summary of findings from the review was based only on high-quality evidence (scoring of > 5 AMSTAR). Other limitations were that identified RCTs were not quality appraised and dichotomous outcomes were also not considered. Economic evaluations took effectiveness estimates from trials that had small sample sizes leading to uncertainty surrounding the effect sizes reported. This, in turn, led to uncertainty of the reported cost-effectiveness and, as such, no robust recommendations could be made in this respect.

CONCLUSIONS

Clinical effectiveness evidence from the high-quality systematic reviews identified in this overview continues to suggest uncertainty as to the effectiveness of many conservative interventions for the treatment of LET. Although new RCT evidence has been identified with either placebo or active controls, there is uncertainty as to the size of effects reported within them because of the small sample size. Conclusions regarding cost-effectiveness are also unclear. We consider that, although updated or new systematic reviews may also be of value, the primary focus of future work should be on conducting large-scale, good-quality clinical trials using a core set of outcome measures (for defined time points) and appropriate follow-up. Subgroup analysis of existing RCT data may be beneficial to ascertain whether or not certain patient groups are more likely to respond to treatments.

STUDY REGISTRATION

This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42013003593.

FUNDING

The National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme.

Lateral epicondylitis: This is still a main indication for extracorporeal shockwave therapy

Extracorporeal shockwave therapy (ESWT) is used in a number of indications in the medical field. A number of tendinopathies show good and excellent results due to evidence based medicine. The treatment of lateral epicondylitis is known to show conflicting results. This overview of the published RCT's on ESWT for lateral epicondylitis tries to show the reasons for this conflicting data-base and point out, why we think that this is still a main indication for extracorporeal shockwave therapy.

A 'novel' model for integrating Sport and Exercise Medicine (SEM) and Musculoskeletal (MSK) management into primary care in the UK

BACKGROUND

Musculoskeletal (MSK) symptoms are common within primary care but some general practitioners (GPs)/family physicians do not feel comfortable managing these symptoms, preferring to refer onwards. We aimed to establish a reproducible GP-staffed MSK and sport and exercise medicine (SEM) clinic within primary care, in keeping with recent policy changes within the UK health system.

METHODS

A monthly MSK and SEM clinic was held within a Belfast GP practice, staffed by 1 GP with a specialist interest in MSK/SEM conditions, and its performance was reviewed over two 3-month periods. Parameters audited included diagnoses, patient satisfaction and secondary care referral rates.

RESULTS

83 patients, 36 males and 47 females, were reviewed in the clinic and the main presenting joint was the shoulder. Patient self-reported satisfaction with the service was high. Comparing referral rates between August and October 2013 and the same period in 2014, overall referrals from the practice were reduced by 147, orthopaedic and rheumatology referrals were reduced by 2 and 3, while physiotherapy and X-ray referrals were reduced by 47 and 90, respectively. Comparing the referral rates between January and March 2014 and the same period in 2015, overall outpatient referrals were reduced by 152, orthopaedic and rheumatology referrals were reduced by 9 and 4, while physiotherapy and X-ray referrals were reduced by 41 and 3, respectively.

DISCUSSION

We present a novel, reproducible service model for managing MSK/SEM symptoms in primary care which could be commissioned by local groups. This model can make sound economic sense and deliver high patient satisfaction within primary care, reducing waiting times and the secondary care referral burden.

Intractable bone marrow edema syndrome of the hip

There is a need for an effective and noninvasive treatment for intractable bone marrow edema syndrome of the hip. Forty-six patients with intractable bone marrow edema syndrome of the hip were retrospectively studied to compare the short-term clinical effects of treatment with high-energy extracorporeal shock wave therapy vs femoral head core decompression. The postoperative visual analog scale score decreased significantly more in the extracorporeal shock wave therapy group compared with the femoral head core decompression group (P<.05). For unilateral lesions, postoperative Harris Hip Scores for all hips in the extracorporeal shock wave therapy group were more significantly improved than Harris Hip Scores for all hips in the femoral head core decompression group (P<.05). Patients who underwent extracorporeal shock wave therapy also resumed daily activities significantly earlier. Average overall operative time was similar in both groups. Symptoms disappeared significantly sooner in the extracorporeal shock wave therapy group in patients with both unilateral (P<.01) and bilateral lesions (P<.05). Hospital costs were significantly lower with extracorporeal shock wave therapy compared with femoral head core decompression. The intraoperative fluoroscopy radiation dose was lower in extracorporeal shock wave therapy than in femoral head core decompression for both unilateral (P<.05) and bilateral lesions (P<.01). On magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), bone marrow edema improved in all patients during the follow-up period. After extracorporeal shock wave therapy, all patients remained pain-free and had normal findings on posttreatment radiographs and MRI scans. Extracorporeal shock wave therapy appears to be a valid, reliable, and noninvasive tool for rapidly resolving intractable bone marrow edema syndrome of the hip, and it has a low complication rate and relatively low cost compared with other conservative and surgical treatment approaches.

Efficacy and safety of extracorporeal shock wave therapy for orthopedic conditions: a systematic review on studies listed in the PEDro database

BACKGROUND

Extracorporeal shock wave therapy (ESWT) is an effective and safe non-invasive treatment option for tendon and other pathologies of the musculoskeletal system.

SOURCES OF DATA

This systematic review used data derived from the Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro; www.pedro.org.au, 23 October 2015, date last accessed).

AREAS OF AGREEMENT

ESWT is effective and safe. An optimum treatment protocol for ESWT appears to be three treatment sessions at 1-week intervals, with 2000 impulses per session and the highest energy flux density the patient can tolerate.

AREAS OF CONTROVERSY

The distinction between radial ESWT as 'low-energy ESWT' and focused ESWT as 'high-energy ESWT' is not correct and should be abandoned.

GROWING POINTS

There is no scientific evidence in favour of either radial ESWT or focused ESWT with respect to treatment outcome.

AREAS TIMELY FOR DEVELOPING RESEARCH

Future randomized controlled trials should primarily address systematic tests of the aforementioned optimum treatment protocol and direct comparisons between radial and focused ESWT.

Injection of autologous blood versus corticosteroid for lateral epicondylitis: a randomised controlled study

PURPOSE

To compare the efficacy of autologous blood injection versus corticosteroid injection for lateral epicondylitis.

METHODS

21 men and 59 women (mean age, 45.2 years) presenting with lateral epicondylitis were randomised to receive either autologous blood injection (2 ml of autologous venous blood mixed with 1 ml of 2% prilocaine hydrochloride) or corticosteroid injection (1 ml of 40 mg methylprednisolone acetate mixed with 1 ml of 2% prilocaine hydrochloride) given by a single physician. Patients were assessed before (day 0) and after (days 15, 30, and 90) treatment for elbow pain (using a visual analogue scale [VAS]), function (using the patient-rated tennis elbow evaluation [PRTEE] questionnaire), and grip strength (using a hydraulic hand dynamometer). Patients were followed up at 6 months by telephone to assess elbow pain using the VAS.

RESULTS

No complications (infection, skin atrophy, neurovascular damage, or tendon rupture) were noted. 10 patients reported increased pain for up to 2 days after autologous blood injection. In both groups, the VAS score for elbow pain, PRTEE score, and grip strength improved significantly after treatment (p=0.0001), but the pattern of improvement differed. Compared with autologous blood injection, corticosteroid injection improved all 3 scores at a faster rate over the first 15 days (p=0.0001), and then started to decline slightly until day 90. After autologous blood injection, all 3 scores improved steadily and were eventually better (p=0.0001). If a 37% decrease in PRTEE is defined as complete recovery, 38 (95%) of patients with autologous blood injection and 25 (62.5%) of patients with corticosteroid injection achieved complete recovery (p=0.0001).

CONCLUSION

Autologous blood injection was more effective over the follow-up period than corticosteroid injection in improving pain, function, and grip strength. It is recommended as a first-line injection treatment because it is simple, cheap, and effective.

Orthobiologics and platelet rich plasma

Orthobiologics have evolved to the extent that they significantly influence modern orthopedic surgical practice. A better understanding of the role of various growth factors and cells in the process of tendon healing, ligament repair, cartilage regeneration and bone formation has stimulated focused research in many chronic musculoskeletal ailments. Investigators have published results of laboratory as well as clinical studies, using orthobiologics like platelet rich plasma, stem cells, autologous conditioned serum etc., with variable results. However, a clear consensus over the best orthobiologic substance and the method of preparation and usage of these substances is lacking. Much of the confusion is due to the fact that studies ranging from RCTs to case reports present variable results, and the interpretations are wide-ranging. We have reviewed the available orthobiologics related data with a focus on platelet rich plasma in orthopedic conditions.

Lateral epicondylitis: review of injection therapies

Lateral epicondylitis has several different treatment methods, with no single agreed upon therapy. This article summarizes the current literature on injection therapies for lateral epicondylitis. Glucocorticoid, botulinum toxin, autologous blood, platelet-rich plasma, hyaluronic acid, polidocanol, glycosaminoglycan, and prolotherapy injections are discussed.

Comparative effectiveness of injection therapies in lateral epicondylitis: a systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Injection therapy with glucocorticoids has been used since the 1950s as a treatment strategy for lateral epicondylitis (tennis elbow). Lately, several novel injection therapies have become available.

PURPOSE

To assess the comparative effectiveness and safety of injection therapies in patients with lateral epicondylitis.

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic review and meta-analysis.

METHODS

Randomized controlled trials comparing different injection therapies for lateral epicondylitis were included provided they contained data for change in pain intensity (primary outcome). Trials were assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. Network (random effects) meta-analysis was applied to combine direct and indirect evidence within and across trial data using the final end point reported in the trials, and results for the arm-based network analyses are reported as standardized mean differences (SMDs).

RESULTS

Seventeen trials (1381 participants; 3 [18%] at low risk of bias) assessing injection with 8 different treatments-glucocorticoid (10 trials), botulinum toxin (4 trials), autologous blood (3 trials), platelet-rich plasma (2 trials), and polidocanol, glycosaminoglycan, prolotherapy, and hyaluronic acid (1 trial each)-were included. Pooled results (SMD [95% confidence interval]) showed that beyond 8 weeks, glucocorticoid injection was no more effective than placebo (-0.04 [-0.45 to 0.35]), but only 1 trial (which did not include a placebo arm) was at low risk of bias. Although botulinum toxin showed marginal benefit (-0.50 [-0.91 to -0.08]), it caused temporary paresis of finger extension, and all trials were at high risk of bias. Both autologous blood (-1.43 [-2.15 to -0.71]) and platelet-rich plasma (-1.13 [-1.77 to -0.49]) were also statistically superior to placebo, but only 1 trial was at low risk of bias. Prolotherapy (-2.71 [-4.60 to -0.82]) and hyaluronic acid (-5.58 [-6.35 to -4.82]) were both more efficacious than placebo, whereas polidocanol (0.39 [-0.42 to 1.20]) and glycosaminoglycan (-0.32 [-1.02 to 0.38]) showed no effect compared with placebo. The criteria for low risk of bias were only met by the prolotherapy and polidocanol trials.

CONCLUSION

This systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials found a paucity of evidence from unbiased trials on which to base treatment recommendations regarding injection therapies for lateral epicondylitis.

Impact of autologous blood injections in treatment of mid-portion Achilles tendinopathy: double blind randomised controlled trial

OBJECTIVE

To assess the effectiveness of two peritendinous autologous blood injections in addition to a standardised eccentric calf strengthening programme in improving pain and function in patients with mid-portion Achilles tendinopathy.

DESIGN

Single centre, participant and single assessor blinded, parallel group, randomised, controlled trial.

SETTING

Single sports medicine clinic in New Zealand.

PARTICIPANTS

53 adults (mean age 49, 53% men) with symptoms of unilateral mid-portion Achilles tendinopathy for at least three months. Participants were excluded if they had a history of previous Achilles tendon rupture or surgery or had undergone previous adjuvant treatments such as injectable therapies, glyceryl trinitrate patches, or extracorporeal shockwave therapy.

INTERVENTIONS

All participants underwent two unguided peritendinous injections one month apart with a standardised protocol. The treatment group had 3 mL of their own whole blood injected while the control group had no substance injected (needling only). Participants in both groups carried out a standardised and monitored 12 week eccentric calf training programme. Follow-up was at one, two, three and six months.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcome measure was the change in symptoms and function from baseline to six months with the Victorian Institute of Sport Assessment-Achilles (VISA-A) score. Secondary outcomes were the participant's perceived rehabilitation and their ability to return to sport.

RESULTS

26 participants were randomly assigned to the treatment group and 27 to the control group. In total, 50 (94%) completed the six month study, with 25 in each group. Clear and clinically worthwhile improvements in the VISA-A score were evident at six months in both the treatment (change in score 18.7, 95% confidence interval 12.3 to 25.1) and control (19.9, 13.6 to 26.2) groups. The overall effect of treatment was not significant (P=0.689) and the 95% confidence intervals at all points precluded clinically meaningful benefit or harm. There was no significant difference between groups in secondary outcomes or in the levels of compliance with the eccentric calf strengthening programme. No adverse events were reported.

CONCLUSION

The administration of two unguided peritendinous autologous blood injections one month apart, in addition to a standardised eccentric training programme, provides no additional benefit in the treatment of mid-portion Achilles tendinopathy.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN12610000824066, WHO U1111-1117-2641.

Autologous blood injection and wrist immobilisation for chronic lateral epicondylitis

Purpose. This study explored the effect of autologous blood injection (with ultrasound guidance) to the elbows of patients who had radiologically assessed degeneration of the origin of extensor carpi radialis brevis and failed cortisone injection/s to the lateral epicondylitis. Methods. This prospective longitudinal series involved preinjection assessment of pain, grip strength, and function, using the patient-rated tennis elbow evaluation. Patients were injected with blood from the contralateral limb and then wore a customised wrist support for five days, after which they commenced a stretching, strengthening, and massage programme with an occupational therapist. These patients were assessed after six months and then finally between 18 months and five years after injection, using the patient-rated tennis elbow evaluation. Results. Thirty-eight of 40 patients completed the study, showing significant improvement in pain; the worst pain decreased by two to five points out of a 10-point visual analogue for pain. Self-perceived function improved by 11–25 points out of 100. Women showed significant increase in grip, but men did not. Conclusions. Autologous blood injection improved pain and function in a worker's compensation cohort of patients with chronic lateral epicondylitis, who had not had relief with cortisone injection.

Effects of corticosteroid on the expressions of neuropeptide and cytokine mRNA and on tenocyte viability in lateral epicondylitis

Background

The purpose of this study was to determine the reaction mechanism of corticosteroid by analyzing the expression patterns of neuropeptides (substance P (SP), calcitonin gene related peptide (CGRP)) and of cytokines (interleukin (IL)-1α, tumor growth factor (TGF)-β) after corticosteroid treatment in lateral epicondylitis. In addition, we also investigated whether corticosteroid influenced tenocyte viability.

Methods

The corticosteroid triamcinolone acetonide (TAA) was applied to cultured tenocytes of lateral epicondylitis, and the changes in the mRNA expressions of neuropeptides and cytokines and tenocyte viabilities were analyzed at seven time points. Quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction and an MTT assay were used.

Results

The expression of SP mRNA was maximally inhibited by TAA at 24 hours but recovered at 72 hours, and the expressions of CGRP mRNA and IL-1α mRNA were inhibited at 24 and 3 hours, respectively. The expression of TGF-β mRNA was not significant. Tenocyte viability was significantly reduced by TAA at 24 hours.

Conclusions

We postulate that the reaction mechanism predominantly responsible for symptomatic relief after a corticosteroid injection involves the inhibitions of neuropeptides and cytokines, such as, CGRP and IL-1α. However the tenocyte viability was compromised by a corticosteroid.

Extracorporeal shockwave therapy in musculoskeletal disorders

The sources of shockwave generation include electrohydraulic, electromagnetic and piezoelectric principles. Electrohydraulic shockwaves are high-energy acoustic waves generated under water explosion with high voltage electrode. Shockwave in urology (lithotripsy) is primarily used to disintegrate urolithiasis, whereas shockwave in orthopedics (orthotripsy) is not used to disintegrate tissues, rather to induce tissue repair and regeneration. The application of extracorporeal shockwave therapy (ESWT) in musculoskeletal disorders has been around for more than a decade and is primarily used in the treatment of sports related over-use tendinopathies such as proximal plantar fasciitis of the heel, lateral epicondylitis of the elbow, calcific or non-calcific tendonitis of the shoulder and patellar tendinopathy etc. The success rate ranged from 65% to 91%, and the complications were low and negligible. ESWT is also utilized in the treatment of non-union of long bone fracture, avascular necrosis of femoral head, chronic diabetic and non-diabetic ulcers and ischemic heart disease. The vast majority of the published papers showed positive and beneficial effects. FDA (USA) first approved ESWT for the treatment of proximal plantar fasciitis in 2000 and lateral epicondylitis in 2002. ESWT is a novel non-invasive therapeutic modality without surgery or surgical risks, and the clinical application of ESWT steadily increases over the years. This article reviews the current status of ESWT in musculoskeletal disorders.

A randomized study comparing corticosteroid injection to corticosteroid iontophoresis for lateral epicondylitis

PURPOSE

We designed a prospective, randomized study to evaluate the effects of iontophoresis delivery of dexamethasone versus corticosteroid injection therapy on patient outcomes.

METHODS

We randomized 82 patients to 10 mg dexamethasone via iontophoresis using a self-contained patch with a 24-hour battery; 10 mg dexamethasone injection; or 10 mg triamcinolone injection. All patients received the same hand therapy protocol. Primary outcomes tracked were change in grip strength (flexion vs extension), pain, and function scores on a validated questionnaire. The secondary outcome was return-to-work status. Patients were evaluated at baseline, completion of physical therapy, and 6-month follow-up.

RESULTS

The iontophoresis patients had statistically significant improvement in grip strength at the conclusion of hand therapy compared with baseline. They were also more likely to get back to work without restriction. By 6-month follow-up, all groups had equivalent results for all measured outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

Dexamethasone via iontophoresis produced short-term benefits because for this group grip strength and unrestricted return to work were significantly better. This study suggests that this iontophoresis technique for delivery of corticosteroid may be considered a treatment option for patients with lateral epicondylitis.

TYPE OF STUDY/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic II.

Management of tennis elbow

CLINICAL QUESTION

What is the best treatment for tennis elbow?

RESULTS

Despite a wealth of research, there is no true consensus on the most efficacious management of tennis elbow especially for effective long-term outcomes. Corticosteroid injections do show large pain-relieving effects in the short term but are associated with risks of adverse events and long-term reoccurrence. Advice with a "wait and see" approach is recommended as the first-line treatment in primary care for most cases. In the medium term physiotherapy and or low-level laser therapy may be effective.

IMPLEMENTATION

Rule out alternative diagnosis. Onward referral may be indicated if the condition does not resolve after 12 months.