Efficacy of neural mobilization and Maitland accessory mobilization in patients with tennis elbow- randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of the study was to evaluate the efficacy of Maitland accessory mobilization and neural mobilization in patients with tennis elbow. METHOD: Twenty-five patients meeting the selection criteria were randomly assigned to three experimental groups: Group C (conventional treatment), Group B (neural mobilization), and Group A (Maitland mobilization). Quality of life was assessed using the Patient Rated Tennis Elbow Evaluation (PRTEE), while pain, range of motion, and grip strength were evaluated using the Visual Analog Scale (VAS), a universal goniometer, and a handheld dynamometer. The interventions were administered three times per week for four weeks to the respective groups. RESULTS: Non-parametric tests were employed to analyze the results due to the non-normal distribution of the data (p < 0.05). Both the Wilcoxon signed-rank test and the Kruskal-Wallis test were utilized to assess differences within and between groups. The results of the between-group analysis demonstrated significant differences in pain (p = 0.018) and quality of life (p = 0.045) among the three groups. CONCLUSION: After a 4-week intervention, all three groups exhibited notable improvements in discomfort levels, grip strength, and quality of life. Notably, Group B demonstrated the most substantial increase in range of motion (ROM) compared to Groups A and C. Consequently, incorporating neural mobilization into the treatment plan is recommended for patients experiencing Tennis Elbow.

Manual therapy and exercise for lateral elbow pain.

BACKGROUND: Manual therapy and prescribed exercises are often provided together or separately in contemporary clinical practice to treat people with lateral elbow pain. OBJECTIVES: To assess the benefits and harms of manual therapy, prescribed exercises or both for adults with lateral elbow pain. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the databases CENTRAL, MEDLINE and Embase, and trial registries until 31 January 2024, unrestricted by language or date of publication. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised or quasi-randomised trials. Participants were adults with lateral elbow pain. Interventions were manual therapy, prescribed exercises or both. Primary comparators were placebo or minimal or no intervention. We also included comparisons of manual therapy and prescribed exercises with either intervention alone, with or without glucocorticoid injection. Exclusions were trials testing a single application of an intervention or comparison of different types of manual therapy or prescribed exercises. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently selected studies for inclusion, extracted trial characteristics and numerical data, and assessed study risk of bias and certainty of evidence using GRADE. The main comparisons were manual therapy, prescribed exercises or both compared with placebo treatment, and with minimal or no intervention. Major outcomes were pain, disability, heath-related quality of life, participant-reported treatment success, participant withdrawals, adverse events and serious adverse events. The primary endpoint was end of intervention for pain, disability, health-related quality of life and participant-reported treatment success and final time point for adverse events and withdrawals. MAIN RESULTS: Twenty-three trials (1612 participants) met our inclusion criteria (mean age ranged from 38 to 52 years, 47% female, 70% dominant arm affected). One trial (23 participants) compared manual therapy to placebo manual therapy, 12 trials (1124 participants) compared manual therapy, prescribed exercises or both to minimal or no intervention, six trials (228 participants) compared manual therapy and exercise to exercise alone, one trial (60 participants) compared the addition of manual therapy to prescribed exercises and glucocorticoid injection, and four trials (177 participants) assessed the addition of manual therapy, prescribed exercises or both to glucocorticoid injection. Twenty-one trials without placebo control were susceptible to performance and detection bias as participants were not blinded to the intervention. Other biases included selection (nine trials, 39%, including two quasi-randomised), attrition (eight trials, 35%) and selective reporting (15 trials, 65%) biases. We report the results of the main comparisons. Manual therapy versus placebo manual therapy Low-certainty evidence, based upon a single trial (23 participants) and downgraded due to indirectness and imprecision, indicates manual therapy may reduce pain and elbow disability at the end of two to three weeks of treatment. Mean pain at the end of treatment was 4.1 points with placebo (0 to 10 scale) and 2.0 points with manual therapy, MD -2.1 points (95% CI -4.2 to -0.1). Mean disability was 40 points with placebo (0 to 100 scale) and 15 points with manual therapy, MD -25 points (95% CI -43 to -7). There was no follow-up beyond the end of treatment to show if these effects were sustained, and no other major outcomes were reported. Manual therapy, prescribed exercises or both versus minimal intervention Low-certainty evidence indicates manual therapy, prescribed exercises or both may slightly reduce pain and disability at the end of treatment, but the effects were not sustained, and there may be little to no improvement in health-related quality of life or number of participants reporting treatment success. We downgraded the evidence due to increased risk of performance bias and detection bias across all the trials, and indirectness due to the multimodal nature of the interventions included in the trials. At four weeks to three months, mean pain was 5.10 points with minimal treatment and manual therapy, prescribed exercises or both reduced pain by a MD of -0.53 points (95% CI -0.92 to -0.14, I2 = 43%; 12 trials, 1023 participants). At four weeks to three months, mean disability was 63.8 points with minimal or no treatment and manual therapy, prescribed exercises or both reduced disability by a MD of -5.00 points (95% CI -9.22 to -0.77, I2 = 63%; 10 trials, 732 participants). At four weeks to three months, mean quality of life was 73.04 points with minimal treatment on a 0 to 100 scale and prescribed exercises reduced quality of life by a MD of -5.58 points (95% CI -10.29 to -0.99; 2 trials, 113 participants). Treatment success was reported by 42% of participants with minimal or no treatment and 57.1% of participants with manual therapy, prescribed exercises or both, RR 1.36 (95% CI 0.96 to 1.93, I2 = 73%; 6 trials, 770 participants). We are uncertain if manual therapy, prescribed exercises or both results in more withdrawals or adverse events. There were 83/566 participant withdrawals (147 per 1000) from the minimal or no intervention group, and 77/581 (126 per 1000) from the manual therapy, prescribed exercises or both groups, RR 0.86 (95% CI 0.66 to 1.12, I2 = 0%; 12 trials). Adverse events were mild and transient and included pain, bruising and gastrointestinal events, and no serious adverse events were reported. Adverse events were reported by 19/224 (85 per 1000) in the minimal treatment group and 70/233 (313 per 1000) in the manual therapy, prescribed exercises or both groups, RR 3.69 (95% CI 0.98 to 13.97, I2 = 72%; 6 trials). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Low-certainty evidence from a single trial in people with lateral elbow pain indicates that, compared with placebo, manual therapy may provide a clinically worthwhile benefit in terms of pain and disability at the end of treatment, although the 95% confidence interval also includes both an important improvement and no improvement, and the longer-term outcomes are unknown. Low-certainty evidence from 12 trials indicates that manual therapy and exercise may slightly reduce pain and disability at the end of treatment, but this may not be clinically worthwhile and these benefits are not sustained. While pain after treatment was an adverse event from manual therapy, the number of events was too small to be certain.

Comparison of local massage, steroid injection, and extracorporeal shock wave therapy efficacy in the treatment of lateral epicondylitis.

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to compare the clinical outcomes of patients with lateral epicondylitis (LE) treated with local massage, corticosteroid (CS) injection, and extracorporeal shock wave therapy (ESWT). PATIENTS AND METHODS: This randomized prospective study included 52 patients. Patients treated with local massage in Group 1 (n=17; 9 males, 8 females; mean age: 46.1±10.9 years; range, 27 to 64 years), CS injection in Group 2 (n=17; 7 males, 10 females; mean age: 46.0±8.8 years; range, 28 to 63 years), and ESWT in Group 3 (n=18; 12 males, 6 females; mean age: 46.7±11.3 years; range, 28 to 68 years) for LE were evaluated between March 2021 and June 2022. Clinical outcomes were assessed using the Visual Analog Scale (VAS), Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (DASH), and DASH-Work Model (DASH-WM) scoring systems at the initial examination at the beginning of the study and at two-week, three-month, and six-month follow-up controls. RESULTS: Similar results were observed between VAS, DASH, and DASH-WM scores measured during LE diagnosis. In the first two weeks of follow-up, statistically significant decreases were observed in VAS, DASH, and DASH-WM scores in all three groups. Compared to baseline values, Group 1 and 2 had significant difference in VAS and DASH scores at three months. Group 3 had a significant difference in all clinical evaluation scores. At six months, no significant difference was observed in Groups 1 and 2 in any of the scoring systems, while Group 3 showed significant improvements in all scoring systems. CONCLUSION: Treatment with ESWT was superior to other treatments throughout the study and at the final follow-up. In patients receiving CS injections, the clinical outcomes worsened with time, evidenced by the six-month follow-up. Further studies on combined treatment modalities are needed on this subject.

Association between Platelet-Derived Growth Factor Receptor Alpha Gene Polymorphisms and Platelet-Rich Plasma's Efficiency in Treating Lateral Elbow Tendinopathy-A Prospective Cohort Study.

Individual differences in the response to platelet-rich plasma (PRP) therapy can be observed among patients. The genetic background may be the cause of this variability. The current study focused on the impact of genetic variants on the effectiveness of PRP. The aim of the present study was to analyze the impact of single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNP) of the platelet-derived growth factor receptor alpha (PDGFRA) gene on the effectiveness of treating lateral elbow tendinopathy (LET) with PRP. The treatment's efficacy was analyzed over time (2, 4, 8, 12, 24, 52 and 104 weeks after the PRP injection) on 107 patients using patient-reported outcome measures (PROM) and achievement of a minimal clinically important difference (MCID). Four SNPs of the PDGFRA gene (rs7668190, rs6554164, rs869978 and rs1316926) were genotyped using the TaqMan assay method. Patients with the AA genotypes of the rs7668190 and the rs1316926 polymorphisms, as well as carriers of the T allele of rs6554164 showed greater effectiveness of PRP therapy than carriers of other genotypes. Moreover, the studied SNPs influenced the platelets' parameters both in whole blood and in PRP. These results showed that PDGFRA gene polymorphisms affect the effectiveness of PRP treatment. Genotyping the rs6554164 and the rs1316926 SNPs may be considered for use in individualized patient selection for PRP therapy.

[A multicenter clinical study on the treatment of lateral epicondylitis of humerus by manipulation].

OBJECTIVE: To investigate clinical effect of tendons pulling,poking and kneading for the treatment of external humeral epicondylitis. METHODS: From January 2018 to December 2021,a multicenter randomized controlled study was performed to collect 192 patients with external humeral epicondylitis in Wangjing Hospital,Beijing Dianli Hospital,and Beijing Fengsheng Osteotraumatology Hospital,respectively,and they were divided into treatment group and control group by random number table method. There were 96 patients in treatment group,including 36 males and 60 females,aged from 28 to 60 years old with an average of (41.20±5.50) years old;the course of disease ranged from 1 to 14 days with an average of (5.24±1.35) days;they were treated once every other day for 2 weeks. There were 96 patients in control group ,including 33 males and 63 females,aged from 26 to 60 years old with an average of (43.35±7.75) years old;the course of disease ranged from 1 to 14 days with an average of (5.86±1.48) days;they were treated with topical voltaalin combined with elbow joint fixation for 2 weeks. Visual analogue scale (VAS) and Hospital for Surgery Scoring System (HSS) elbow pronation and supination angles,wrist metacarpal flexion and dorsal extension angles,elbow tenderness between two groups were compared before treatment and at 1,3,5,7,11 and 13 days after treatment;Hospital for Surgery Scoring System 2 (HSS2) was compared before treatment and the final treatment. RESULTS: All patients were followed up for 10 to 14 days with an average of (12±1.6) days. VAS between treatment group and control group before treatment were 6.83±1.36 and 6.79±1.58,respectively,and decreased to 1.49±1.09 and 2.11±1.81 after the final treatment. VAS of treatment group were significantly lower than those of control group at 1,3,5,7,9,11 and 13 days after treatment (P<0.05). HSS between two groups were 61.73±11.00 and 36.47±12.45 before treatment,respectively,and increased to 94.42±5.9 and 91.44±9.11 at the final treatment. HSS of treatment group were significantly higher than those of control group at 1,3,5,7,9,11 and 13 days after treatment (P<0.05). On the 5th day after treatment,the external and internal rotation angles of elbow in treatment group were (66.41±12.69) ° and (66.35±13.54) °,while those in control group were (62.08±16.03) ° and (61.77±16.35) °. On the 7th day after treatment,the external and internal rotation angles of elbow were (69.79±12.64) ° and (70.02±13.55) ° in treatment group,and (65.28±15.86) ° and (65.09±16.67) ° in control group. Elbow joint motion in treatment group was higher than that in control group (P<0.05). On the 5th day after treatment,angles of wrist dorsiflexion and palm flexion were (39.43±15.94) ° and (46.68±11.10) ° in treatment group,and (38.51±18.49) ° and (44.27±13.58) ° in control group. On the 7th day after treatment,angles of wrist dorsiflexion and palm flexion were (42.52±16.50) ° and (49.23±10.96) ° in treatment group,and (41.18±20.09) ° and (46.64±14.63) ° in control group. The motion of wrist joint in treatment group was higher than that in control group (P<0.05). On the 13th day after treatment,HSS2 in treatment group 93.61±6.32 were higher than those in control group 92.06±7.94(P<0.05). There was no significant difference in elbow tenderness between two groups at each time point (P>0.05). CONCLUSION: Voltaren external treatment combined with elbow fixation and tendons pulling,poking and kneading could effectively improve symptoms of external humeral epicondylitis. Compared with voltaren external treatment,tendons pulling,poking and kneading has advantages of longer analgesic time and better elbow function recovery.

Treating Lateral Epicondylopathy With Dry Needling and Exercise: A Case Series.

CONTEXT: Lateral epicondylopathy (LE) is a common overuse injury affecting elbow, wrist, and hand function. It is characterized by weakness and pain in the muscles and tendons of the forearm responsible for the extension of your wrist and fingers. Trigger point dry needling is a technique reported to be beneficial in managing pain and dysfunction after LE diagnosis. LE is also commonly treated with conservative treatment, such as joint and soft tissue mobilization, self-care home programs, and anti-inflammatory use. We explored a different dry needling approach consisting of in situ dry needling with electric stimulation combined with targeted therapeutic exercise to treat LE in 3 cases. CASE PRESENTATION: Three patients were referred for dry needling once a week for 6 weeks and home-based exercise therapy for LE. They were clinically evaluated using grip strength, a visual analog scale to assess pain, and Patient-Rated Tennis Elbow Evaluation Test scores. These were measured at 4 time points (weeks 0, 2, 4, and 6). MANAGEMENT AND OUTCOMES: The dry needling intervention incorporated 8 locations in the upper-extremity with 2 electric stimulation channels. The patients had reduced pain as measured by a visual analog scale, increased function as measured by the Patient-Rated Tennis Elbow Evaluation Test, and increased grip strength over 6 weeks. CONCLUSIONS: This case series illustrates the use of dry needling and a home exercise program to provide a favorable outcome in a patient with LE. Patients had an 80% to 100% reduction in pain and similar improvements in function that were significantly beyond the minimum clinically important difference. This dry needling approach is a safe and effective treatment of LE in the short term.

Effects of a Conventional Treatment Plus Scapular Exercises Program in Patients With Chronic Lateral Elbow Tendinopathy: A Pre-Post Single-Group Study.

BACKGROUND: Weakness of the shoulder girdle muscles has been reported in patients with chronic lateral elbow tendinopathy. The aim of this study was to assess the short- and long-term effects of a conventional treatment plus scapular exercises program in patients with chronic lateral elbow tendinopathy. METHODS: A single-group prestudy and poststudy were conducted. The primary outcome was the Patient-Rated Tennis Elbow Evaluation questionnaire score. Secondary outcomes were grip strength; Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand questionnaire score; Visual Analogue Scale score at rest and at grip, and presence of scapular dyskinesis. RESULTS: A total of 65 patients (72.3% females), with a mean age of 41.8 years, were analyzed. At the end of 6 weeks, the results showed clinically and statistically significant differences (P < .05). At 1-year follow-up, the differences were: Patient-Rated Tennis Elbow Evaluation -31 points (P < .001); grip strength +33.6% (P < .001); Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand -34.2 points (P < .001); Visual Analogue Scale at rest -2.5 cm (P < .001); and Visual Analogue Scale at grip -2.3 cm (P < .001). CONCLUSION: At the end of 6 weeks and at 1-year follow-up, conventional treatment plus scapular exercises program showed statistically and clinically significant differences in all functional outcomes assessed in patients with lateral elbow tendinopathy.

Clinical and Ultrasonographic Effectiveness of Two Different Splints Used for the Treatment of Lateral Epicondylitis: A Prospective Randomized Controlled Study.

OBJECTIVE: This study compares the clinical and ultrasonographic efficacy of 2 splint types, the lateral epicondylitis band (LEB) and the wrist extensor splint (WES), for treatment of lateral epicondylitis (LE). DESIGN: Randomized controlled single-blind trial. SETTING: Outpatient clinic. PARTICIPANTS: 159 participants diagnosed with unilateral LE based on clinical and ultrasonographic findings, and 2-12 weeks from symptom onset, were included (N=159). INTERVENTIONS: One group received joint-protection education-only (wait-and-see), while the other 2 groups were fit with splints: one the LEB and the other the WES. Both splint groups received joint-protection education. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome measure was the Patient-Rated Tennis Elbow Evaluation (PRTEE) questionnaire. Secondary outcome measures were the Visual Analog Scale (VAS) for pain, hand grip strength by dynamometry, algometric measurements, patient satisfaction, and selected ultrasonographic parameters (maximum tendon thickness measurements (MTTM) in the capitellar-radiocapitellar region and total ultrasonography scale score [TUSS]). All outcomes were assessed at baseline, 3-weeks, and 6-weeks post intervention initiation. RESULTS: Participants' mean age was 46.85±8.63 years. Of the participants, 40.88% (n=65) were male and 59.12% (n=94) were female. The baseline median (1Q-3Q) values of PRTEE-total scores were 58.5 (51-68) for the LEB, 63.5 (56.25-70.25) for the WES and 57 (48-68) for the education-only groups. At 6-weeks, the PRTEE-total scores had decreased by 44 points for those randomized to the LEB, 46 points to the WES and 7 points in the education-only groups(P<.001). While the LEB and WES approaches were superior to the wait-and-see approach in algometric measurements, VAS, and PRTEE scores (P<.05), no significant changes were found in MTTM and TUSS values. The LEB group was superior to the WES group in hand grip strength and patient satisfaction (P<.05). CONCLUSION: Using either splint for 6 weeks can be considered effective for the relief of pain and increased functionality in persons with subacute LE, although the LEB had a more positive effect on grip strength and patient satisfaction than the WES.

Comparative analysis of the therapeutic effects of extracorporeal shock wave therapy and high-intensity laser therapy in lateral epicondylitis: a randomised clinical trial.

Lateral epicondylitis (LE) presents a substantial obstacle due to the pain and functional decline, frequently requiring non-surgical treatments. This study contrasts the efficacy of high-intensity laser therapy (HILT) and extracorporeal shock wave therapy (ESWT) in managing LE. A prospective, randomized comparative trial was conducted with 50 participants assigned to either HILT or ESWT groups. Both groups received standard physiotherapy (exercise program and LE bandages), and outcomes, including tenderness, Visual Analog Scale (VAS), Quick Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand scale (Q-DASH), and grip strength, were assessed at baseline, 3rd weeks, and 12th weeks. The baseline features of the groups exhibited similarities (p > 0.05). In intra-group comparisons, both HILT and ESWT groups exhibited significant enhancements in tenderness, VAS, Q-DASH, and grip strength (p < 0.05). In inter-group comparisons, the HILT group exhibited superior outcomes in tenderness reduction, pain alleviation, and disability improvement compared to the ESWT group (p < 0.05). Grip strength did not differ significantly across the groups (p > 0.05). Both HILT and ESWT, when combined with standard physiotherapy, showed effectiveness in treating LE. However, HILT demonstrated greater efficacy in terms of tenderness reduction, pain relief, and disability improvement. This study suggests that non-invasive techniques, particularly HILT, can be preferable for managing LE.

Comparison of the efficiency of peloidotherapy and extracorporeal shock wave therapies in patients diagnosed with lateral epicondylitis: a prospective, randomized, controlled study.

Various treatment methods are used in the management of lateral epicondylitis (LE); however, there is no universally accepted standard treatment approach. The aim of this study is to compare the effects of peloidotherapy and extracorporeal shock wave therapy (ESWT) on pain, functional status, and quality of life in the treatment of LE. The study was designed as a hospital-based, prospective randomized controlled trial. Ninety patients, with a mean age of 47.30±7.95 (range, 18 to 65 years), diagnosed with chronic (3 months) unilateral LE were included in the study. The patients were randomly divided into two groups. The peloidotherapy group received 15 sessions of peloid therapy for 3 weeks, 5 days a week, while the ESWT group received three sessions of ESWT (1.8 bar, 10.0 Hz, 2000 impulses) for 3 weeks, once a week. The patients were evaluated before treatment, at the end of the treatment, and one month after the treatment. The groups were compared in terms of pain, quality of life, functional status, and handgrip strength. At the end of the treatment and one-month follow-up, statistically significant improvements were observed in all parameters. This study is the first randomized trial comparing peloidotherapy to ESWT as an adjunct to exercise therapy in LE. Both ESWT and peloidotherapy, when added to exercise therapy, showed positive short-term effects on pain, quality of life, functional status, and handgrip strength in primary conservative treatment of chronic LE (p<0.001), and no superiority was found between them in terms of efficacy. Peloidotherapy or ESWT may be preferred in the treatment of lateral epicondylitis, depending on the patient's condition. Peloidotherapy appears to be more advantageous due to its lower side effects and painless nature. ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT04748406.

In the Treatment of Lateral Epicondylitis by Percutaneous Perforation, Injectables Have No Added Value.

BACKGROUND: No single injection therapy has been proven to be superior in the treatment of lateral epicondylitis. In most studies, the injection technique is not standardized, which makes it challenging to compare outcomes. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: (1) Does injection with autologous blood, dextrose, or needle perforation only at the extensor carpi radialis brevis tendon origin produce better VAS pain scores during provocation testing at 5 months of follow-up? (2) Which percutaneous technique resulted in better secondary outcome measures: VAS during rest and activity, VAS during maximum grip, Oxford elbow score (OES), QuickDASH, Patient-related Tennis Elbow Evaluation (PRTEE), or EuroQol-5D (EQ-5D)? METHODS: In this multicenter, randomized controlled trial performed from November 2015 to January 2020, 166 patients with lateral epicondylitis were included and assigned to one of the three treatment groups: autologous blood, dextrose, or perforation only. Complete follow-up data were available for the primary outcome measures at the 5-month follow-up interval for 77% (127 of 166) of patients. Injections of the extensor carpi radialis brevis tendon were conducted in an accurate and standardized way. The three groups did not differ in terms of key variables such as age, gender, duration of symptoms, smoking habits, pain medication, and physiotherapy use. Data were collected at baseline and 8 weeks, 5 months, and 1 year after treatment and compared among the groups. The primary endpoint was the VAS pain score with provocation at 5 months. Our secondary study outcomes were VAS pain scores during rest, after activity, and after maximum grip strength; functional recovery; and quality of life. Therefore, we report the VAS pain score (0 to 100, with higher scores representing more-severe pain, minimum clinically important difference [MCID] 10), OES (0 to 48, with higher scores representing more satisfactory joint function, MCID 10), QuickDASH (0 to 100, with higher scores representing more severe disability, MCID 5.3), PRTEE (0 to 100, with higher scores representing more pain or more disability, MCID 20), EQ-5D/QALY (EQ-5D sumscore 0 to 1, with the maximum score of 1 representing the best health state, MCID 0.04), and EQ-5D VAS (0 to 100, with higher scores representing the best health status, MCID 8). For analysis, one-way analysis of variance and a linear mixed-model analysis were used. The analyses were performed according to the intention-to-treat principle. Four patients from the perforation group opted to crossover to autologous blood after 5 months. RESULTS: No injection therapy proved to be superior to any other in terms of VAS pain scores during the provocation test at 5 months of follow-up (VAS for perforation: 25 ± 31; autologous blood: 26 ± 27; dextrose: 29 ± 32; p = 0.35). For the secondary outcomes, only a clinically important difference was found for the QuickDASH score. Both the perforation-only group (-8 [98% CI -4 to -12]) and autologous blood (-7 points [98% CI -3 to -11]) had improved QuickDASH scores over time compared with the dextrose group (MCID 5.3; p < 0.01). For the other outcomes, no clinically important differences were found. CONCLUSION: There is no benefit to injectable autologous blood and dextrose over perforation alone to treat lateral epicondylitis, and they are therefore not indicated for this condition. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level I, therapeutic study.

A meta-analysis of the risk factors for lateral epicondylitis.

BACKGROUND: Very few meta-analyses discussed risk factors for lateral epicondylitis (LE), and previous meta-analyses reached conflicting conclusions with each other on some specific risk factors. PURPOSE: To investigate the risk factors for LE through meta-analysis. STUDY DESIGN: Meta-analysis. METHODS: PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science databases were searched for relevant studies in January 2022. Raw data were extracted into a predefined worksheet, and quality analysis was conducted by the Quality in Prognosis Studies (QUIPS) tool. Pooled effect sizes and 95% confidence intervals were calculated. R package "meta" was used for statistical analysis. RESULTS: 22 studies were included in the meta-analysis. Female sex (odds ratio [OR]=1.33 and p-value<0.05), smoking history (OR=1.46 and p-value<0.001), manual labor (OR=2.39 and p-value<0.001), and hypercholesterolemia (OR=1.67 and p-value<0.05) were significant risk factors for LE. CONCLUSIONS: Female gender, smoking history, manual labor, and hypercholesterolemia could increase the risk of LE. According to an additional literature review, statin treatment for hypercholesterolemia is described as potentially related to the development of LE.

Genetic Variability in VEGFA Gene Influences the Effectiveness of Tennis Elbow Therapy with PRP: A Two-Year Prospective Cohort Study.

Vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) is implicated in both the etiology of tendinopathy and its healing process. Polymorphic variants of the VEGFA gene exhibit varied expression, which can influence the phenotype and treatment effectiveness. The aim of the present study was to analyze the influence of VEGFA gene variants on the effectiveness of tennis elbow therapy using platelet-rich plasma (PRP), measured through common patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). A cohort of 107 patients (132 elbows) with tennis elbow was prospectively analyzed, with a two-year follow-up (at weeks 2, 4, 8, 12, 24, 52, and 104 after PRP injection). PROMs values were compared between variants of five VEGFA gene polymorphisms (rs699947 A>C, rs2010963 C>G, rs1413711 C>T, rs3024998 C>T and rs3025021 C>T) at each follow-up point. Patients with genotypes GG (rs2010963) and CC (rs3024998) had better response to PRP therapy (significantly fewer symptoms and limitations in the upper limb compared to carriers of alleles C and T, respectively). Polymorphisms influenced also selected hematological parameters. VEGFA gene polymorphisms (rs2010963 and rs3024998) appear to be significant treatment modifiers for tendinopathy, and their genotyping may serve as an effective tool for personalized patient selection for PRP therapy.

Bracing or kinesio taping in the management of lateral elbow tendinopathy: A prospective, randomized single-blinded trial.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study was to compare the effects of forearm counter force brace (FCB) and kinesio taping (KT) on pain severity, grip strength and functionality of patients with lateral elbow tendinopathy (LET). METHODS: The study was planned as a prospective, randomized and assessor-blinded study with 1-month follow-up period. Seventy-two patients, diagnosed as LET were randomly assigned to FCB (n = 41) or KT (n = 31) groups. In the FCB group, the patients were informed and instructed to wear the brace for three weeks continuously. In the KT group, tape was applied once a week for four weeks with muscle inhibition and fascia correction techniques. The outcome measures were pain pressure threshold (PPT), maximal pain-free hand grip strength measurement and patient-rated tennis elbow evaluation questionnaire (PRTEE). The assessments were performed at the baseline, immediately after treatment and one month later after treatment. RESULTS: PPT and grip strength were significantly increased over time in both groups. Pain, function and total scores of PRTEE were significantly decreased in both FCB and KT groups. The effect size of the improvement in PRTEE function score was within acceptable clinical significance in the KT group. However, there was no significant difference between groups. CONCLUSIONS: Pain severity, grip strength and functionality of patients with LET improved over time in both FCB and KT groups. However, neither was superior in the management of LET.

Long-term effectiveness of conservative management for lateral epicondylitis: a meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the long-term (>12 months) effectiveness of conservative management for lateral epicondylitis. DATA SOURCES: PubMed and Embase databases were searched for relevant studies from inception to March 2023. STUDY SELECTION AND DATA EXTRACTION: Only English-written randomized controlled trial (RCT) with data download as well as follow up ≥12 months were acceptable. Raw data were extracted into a predefined worksheet, and quality analysis was conducted based on the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool version 2 (RoB2). DATA SYNTHESIS: The standardized mean difference (SMD) with 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated. RESULTS: Extracorporeal shock wave therapy (ESWT) could significantly relive pain for lateral epicondylitis patients in the long term (SMD: -0.19, 95% CI [-0.36, -0.02]); however, there was no significant difference between ESWT and control groups in long-term function outcome (SMD: 0.24, 95% CI [-0.02, -0.49]). No significant difference could be observed between (1) exercise and control groups in pain (SMD: -0.21, 95% CI [-0.60, 0.18]) or function (SMD: 0.06, 95% CI [-0.11, 0.23]), (2) corticosteroids and placebo groups in pain (SMD: 0.70, 95% CI [-0.43, 1.82]) or function (SMD: -0.02, 95% CI [-0.36, 0.31]), and (3) platelet-rich plasma (PRP) in pain (SMD: -0.30, 95% CI [-0.85, 0.25]) and function (SMD: -0.08, 95% CI [-0.78, 0.62]). CONCLUSION: The present conventional conservative management for lateral epicondylitis, with the exception of ESWT, a lack adequate evidence supporting their long-term effectiveness.

Assessment of common extensor tendon vascularization using superb microvascular imaging: a potential tool in the evaluation of extracorporeal shock wave therapy and therapeutic ultrasound effectiveness in lateral epicondylitis.

BACKGROUND: Lateral epicondylitis, also known as tennis elbow, is the most common elbow pain in the adult age group. PURPOSE: To evaluate common extensor tendon (CET) vascularity with superb microvascular imaging (SMI) before and after extracorporeal shock wave therapy (ESWT) and ultrasound (US) treatment in patients with lateral epycondylitis and to compare the effects of two different treatments on tendon vascularity. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Patients with lateral epycondylitis were divided into two groups; 30 patients were treated with ESWT (group 1) and 30 patients were treated with therapeutic US (group 2). We performed a high-frequency (14-MHz) linear array transducer to evaluate tendon anatomy and vascularity before and after treatment in both groups. RESULTS: The decrease in Patient-Rated Tennis Elbow Evaluation (PRTEE) score after treatment was statistically significant compared to pre-treatment for both groups (P < 0.001). Likewise, the decrease in visual analog scale (VAS) score after treatment was statistically significant compared to pre-treatment for both groups (P < 0.001). A significant difference was found between the CET SMI values of group 1 and group 2 after treatment, according to the chi-square test (P < 0.001). In the post-treatment VAS and PRTEE comparison of both groups, the score reduction in group 1 was higher than in group 2, and this decrease was statistically significant (P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: We can evaluate CET vascularization with the SMI method as a new potential diagnostic tool in comparing the effectiveness of different treatments in cases of lateral epicondylitis.

Comparing the effectiveness of prolotherapy and percutaneous dry needling in the treatment of lateral epicondylitis: a retrospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVE: Lateral epicondylitis (LE) can result in a functional loss in patients because of pain and has recently become more prevalent. This study compared the effects of minimally invasive prolotherapy (PRO) and percutaneous dry needling (PDN) on LE treatment. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients were divided into three groups; Group 1 included patients undergoing PDN, Group 2 included those undergoing PRO, and Group 3 included those undergoing PDN+PRO. All these treatments were administered three times and at a 3-week interval in each patient. Data on the visual analog scale (VAS) and patient-rated tennis elbow evaluation (PRTEE) scale scores of the patients were collected at weeks 0, 3, and 6 and month 6 and retrospectively analyzed. RESULTS: The VAS and PRTEE scores decreased in all groups. The decrease in Group 3 was higher than that in the other groups (p<0.001). Upon evaluating within-group differences in VAS and PRTEE scores, the scores at week 3, week 6, and month 6 gradually decreased compared with the baseline in all groups (p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: PDN and PRO are minimally invasive and can successfully treat LE. A combination of PDN+PRO provides better results than PDN or PRO alone. As the materials we used in these treatments are relatively inexpensive and readily available, we believe our study will help reduce the national healthcare costs allocated for the treatment of LE.

Minimal important difference, patient acceptable symptom state and longitudinal validity of oxford elbow score and the quickDASH in patients with tennis elbow.

BACKGROUND: The Oxford Elbow Score (OES) and the short version of Disabilities of Arms, Shoulder and Hand (QuickDASH) are common patient-reported outcomes for people with elbow problems. Our primary objective was to define thresholds for the Minimal Important Difference (MID) and Patient-Acceptable Symptom State (PASS) for the OES and QuickDASH. The secondary aim was to compare the longitudinal validity of these outcome measures. METHODS: We recruited 97 patients with clinically-diagnosed tennis elbow for a prospective observational cohort study in a pragmatic clinical setting. Fifty-five participants received no specific intervention, 14 underwent surgery (11 as primary treatment and 4 during follow-up), and 28 received either botulinum toxin injection or platelet rich plasma injection. We collected OES (0 to 100, higher is better) and QuickDASH (0 to 100, higher is worse), and global rating of change (as an external transition anchor question) at six weeks, three months, six months and 12 months. We defined MID and PASS values using three approaches. To assess the longitudinal validity of the measures, we calculated the Spearman's correlation coefficient between the change in the outcome scores and external transition anchor question, and the Area Under the Curve (AUC) from a receiver operating characteristics (ROC) analysis. To assess signal-to-noise ratio, we calculated standardized response means. RESULTS: Depending on the method, MID values ranged from 16 to 21 for OES Pain; 10 to 17 for OES Function; 14 to 28 for OES Social-psychological; 14 to 20 for OES Total score, and - 7 to -9 for QuickDASH. Patient-Acceptable Symptom State (PASS) cut offs were 74 to 84 for OES Pain; 88 to 91 for OES Function; 75 to 78 with OES Social-psychological; 80 to 81 with OES Total score and 19 to 23 with Quick-DASH. OES had stronger correlations with the anchor items, and AUC values suggested superior discrimination (between improved and not improved) compared with QuickDASH. OES also had superior signal-to-noise ratio compared with QuickDASH. CONCLUSION: The study provides MID and PASS values for OES and QuickDASH. Due to better longitudinal validity, OES may be a better choice for clinical trials. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02425982 (first registered April 24, 2015).