Comparing Ultrasound-Guided Needling Combined With a Subacromial Corticosteroid Injection Versus High-Energy Extracorporeal Shockwave Therapy for Calcific Tendinitis of the Rotator Cuff: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

PURPOSE: To compare clinical and radiographic outcomes after treatment with standardized high-energy extracorporeal shock wave therapy (ESWT) and ultrasound-guided needling (UGN) in patients with symptomatic calcific tendinitis of the rotator cuff who were nonresponsive to conservative treatment. METHODS: The study was designed as a randomized controlled trial. The ESWT group received ESWT (2000 pulses, energy flux density 0.35 mJ/mm2) in 4 sessions with 1-week intervals. UGN was combined with a corticosteroid ultrasound-guided subacromial bursa injection. Shoulder function was assessed at standardized follow-up intervals (6 weeks and 3, 6, and 12 months) using the Constant Murley Score (CMS), the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand questionnaire, and visual analog scale for pain and satisfaction. The size, location, and morphology of the deposits were evaluated on radiographs. The a priori sample size calculation computed that 44 participants randomized in each treatment group was required to achieve a power of 80%. RESULTS: Eighty-two patients were treated (56 female, 65%; mean age 52.1 ± 9 years) with a mean baseline CMS of 66.8 ± 12 and mean calcification size of 15.1 ± 4.7 mm. One patient was lost to follow-up. At 1-year follow-up, the UGN group showed similar results as the ESWT group with regard to the change from baseline CMS (20.9 vs 15.7; P = .23), Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand questionnaire (-20.1 vs -20.7; P = .78), and visual analog scale for pain (-3.9 and -2.6; P = .12). The mean calcification size decreased by 13 ± 3.9 mm in the UGN group and 6.7 ± 8.2 mm in the ESWT group (

Effectiveness of standardized ultrasound guided percutaneous treatment of lateral epicondylitis with application of autologous blood, dextrose or perforation only on pain: a study protocol for a multi-center, blinded, randomized controlled trial with a 1 year follow up.

BACKGROUND: In the treatment of Lateral Epicondylitis (LE) no single intervention concerning injection therapies has been proven to be the most effective with regard to pain reduction. In this trial 3 injection therapies (perforation with application of autologous blood, perforation with application of dextrose and perforation only) will be compared in a standardized and ultrasound guided way. The objective is to assess the effectiveness of these 3 injection therapies on pain, quality of life and functional recovery. By conducting this study, we hope to make a statement on the effectiveness of injection therapy in the treatment of LE. Hereby, unnecessary treatments can be avoided, a more universal method of treatment can be established and the quality of the treatment can be improved. METHODS/DESIGN: A multicenter, randomized controlled trial with a superiority design and 12 months follow-up will be conducted in four Dutch hospitals. One hundred sixty five patients will be recruited in the age of 18 to 65 years, with chronic symptomatic lateral epicondylitis lasting longer than 6 weeks, which have concordant pain during physical examination. Patients will be randomized by block randomization to one of the three treatment arms. The treatment will be blinded for patients and outcome assessors. The following three injection therapies are compared: perforation with application of autologous blood, perforation with application of dextrose and perforation only. Injections will be performed ultrasound guided in a standardized and automated way. The primary endpoint is: pain (change in 'Visual Analogue Scale'). Secondary endpoints are quality of life and functional recovery. These measurements are collected at baseline, 8 weeks, 5 months and 1 year after treatment. DISCUSSION: When completed, this trial will provide evidence on the effectiveness of injection therapy in the treatment of lateral epicondylitis on pain, quality of life and functional recovery. In current literature proper comparison of the effectiveness of injectables for LE is questionable, due to the lack of standardization of the treatment. This study will overcome bias due to manually performed injection therapy. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This study is registered in the Trial Register ( www.trialregister.nl ) of the Dutch Cochrane centre. Trial ID; NTR4569. http://www.trialregister.nl/trialreg/admin/rctview.asp?TC=4569.