Is ultrasound-guided lavage an effective intervention for rotator cuff calcific tendinopathy? A systematic review with a meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.

hydroxyapatites and needling rotator cuff shoulder tendinopathy

Journal

BMJ open sport & exercise medicine
ISSN: 2055-7647
Titre abrégé: BMJ Open Sport Exerc Med
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101681007

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
2019
Historique:
accepted: 21 02 2019
entrez: 14 6 2019
pubmed: 14 6 2019
medline: 14 6 2019
Statut: epublish

Résumé

Rotator cuff calcific tendinopathy is characterised by the deposition of hydroxyapatite crystals in one of the rotator cuff tendons and can be managed by ultrasound-guided lavage. However, evidence regarding the efficacy of ultrasound-guided lavage for rotator cuff calcific tendinopathy remains inconclusive. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to update the available evidence on the efficacy of ultrasound-guided lavage in adults with rotator cuff calcific tendinopathy. A literature search was conducted up to April 2018 in four bibliographic databases to identify randomised control trials that compared ultrasound-guided lavage alone with other interventions to treat rotator cuff calcific tendinopathy. Randomised control trials were assessed with the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool. Meta-analyses and/or qualitative synthesis of the evidence were performed. Three randomised control trials were included. Pooled results for pain (n=226) indicated that ultrasound-guided lavage may significantly decrease pain when compared with shockwave therapy, with a mean difference of -1.98 out of 10 points (95% CI -2.52 to -1.45) in the short term and of -1.84 (95% CI -2.63 to -1.04) in the long term. Based on one trial (n=25), ultrasound-guided lavage significantly improved function when compared with shockwave therapy (p<0.05). Based on another trial (n=48), the addition of ultrasound-guided lavage to a corticosteroid injection significantly improves function in the long term (p<0.05). For individuals with rotator cuff calcific tendinopathy, low-quality evidence suggests that ultrasound-guided lavage is more effective than shockwave therapy or a corticosteroid injection alone. Future trials could modify the present conclusions. CRD42018095858.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND BACKGROUND
Rotator cuff calcific tendinopathy is characterised by the deposition of hydroxyapatite crystals in one of the rotator cuff tendons and can be managed by ultrasound-guided lavage. However, evidence regarding the efficacy of ultrasound-guided lavage for rotator cuff calcific tendinopathy remains inconclusive. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to update the available evidence on the efficacy of ultrasound-guided lavage in adults with rotator cuff calcific tendinopathy.
METHODS METHODS
A literature search was conducted up to April 2018 in four bibliographic databases to identify randomised control trials that compared ultrasound-guided lavage alone with other interventions to treat rotator cuff calcific tendinopathy. Randomised control trials were assessed with the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool. Meta-analyses and/or qualitative synthesis of the evidence were performed.
RESULTS RESULTS
Three randomised control trials were included. Pooled results for pain (n=226) indicated that ultrasound-guided lavage may significantly decrease pain when compared with shockwave therapy, with a mean difference of -1.98 out of 10 points (95% CI -2.52 to -1.45) in the short term and of -1.84 (95% CI -2.63 to -1.04) in the long term. Based on one trial (n=25), ultrasound-guided lavage significantly improved function when compared with shockwave therapy (p<0.05). Based on another trial (n=48), the addition of ultrasound-guided lavage to a corticosteroid injection significantly improves function in the long term (p<0.05).
CONCLUSION CONCLUSIONS
For individuals with rotator cuff calcific tendinopathy, low-quality evidence suggests that ultrasound-guided lavage is more effective than shockwave therapy or a corticosteroid injection alone. Future trials could modify the present conclusions.
TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER BACKGROUND
CRD42018095858.

Identifiants

pubmed: 31191964
doi: 10.1136/bmjsem-2018-000506
pii: bmjsem-2018-000506
pmc: PMC6539165
doi:

Types de publication

Systematic Review

Langues

eng

Pagination

e000506

Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts

Competing interests: All authors except NJB report grants from Institut de recherche Robert-Sauvé en santé et sécurité au travail (IRSST) during the conduct of the study which may be considered as a potential conflict of interest. However, since the IRSST is not a private company and does not have any financial interest in the treatment of shoulder disorders, this grant should not be considered as a conflict of interest. We still decided to declare this grant as a potential conflict of interest.

Références

Clin Orthop. 1961;20:49-60
pubmed: 13762581
Scand J Rheumatol. 2004;33(2):73-81
pubmed: 15163107
J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2005 Apr;87(4):501-7
pubmed: 15795200
Curr Rheumatol Rep. 2009 Apr;11(2):129-34
pubmed: 19296885
J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2009 Nov-Dec;18(6):927-32
pubmed: 19535272
J Clin Epidemiol. 2010 May;63(5):575-84
pubmed: 19836206
Joint Bone Spine. 2010 May;77(3):258-63
pubmed: 20434387
Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1990 May;(254):111-20
pubmed: 2157572
Scand J Rheumatol. 2012 Mar;41(2):150-5
pubmed: 21936616
BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2012 Nov 29;13:238
pubmed: 23190941
Semin Musculoskelet Radiol. 2013 Feb;17(1):80-4
pubmed: 23487339
Am J Sports Med. 2013 Jul;41(7):1665-73
pubmed: 23696211
J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2013 Dec;22(12):1650-5
pubmed: 23850308
J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2014 Aug;23(8):1083-90
pubmed: 24726486
J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2014 Aug;23(8):1240-9
pubmed: 24774621
Arthroscopy. 2014 Sep;30(9):1166-72
pubmed: 24813322
J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2014 Nov;23(11):1640-6
pubmed: 25219475
AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2015 Jan;204(1):148-52
pubmed: 25539250
Eur Radiol. 2015 Jul;25(7):2176-83
pubmed: 25583182
J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2015 Oct;24(10):1588-93
pubmed: 25870115
Skeletal Radiol. 2016 Jan;45(1):49-55
pubmed: 26306389
Eur J Phys Rehabil Med. 2016 Apr;52(2):145-51
pubmed: 26365144
Arthroscopy. 2016 Jan;32(1):165-75
pubmed: 26382637
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016 Jun 10;(6):CD012225
pubmed: 27283591
Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol. 2017 Apr;27(3):381-390
pubmed: 27554465
Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2017 Aug;98(8):1678-1692.e6
pubmed: 28400182
J Orthop. 2017 Aug 01;14(4):466-469
pubmed: 28831234
Am J Sports Med. 2017 Dec;45(14):3305-3314
pubmed: 28898104
Musculoskelet Sci Pract. 2018 Jun;35:30-33
pubmed: 29471221

Auteurs

Simon Lafrance (S)

Maisonneuve-Rosemont Hospital Research Center, University of Montreal Affiliated Research Center, Montreal, Canada.

Patrick Doiron-Cadrin (P)

Maisonneuve-Rosemont Hospital Research Center, University of Montreal Affiliated Research Center, Montreal, Canada.

Marie Saulnier (M)

Maisonneuve-Rosemont Hospital Research Center, University of Montreal Affiliated Research Center, Montreal, Canada.

Martin Lamontagne (M)

Department of Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, University of Montreal, Montreal, Canada.
University of Montreal Hospital Center Research Center (CRCHUM), Montreal, Canada.

Nathalie J Bureau (NJ)

University of Montreal Hospital Center Research Center (CRCHUM), Montreal, Canada.
Department of Radiology, Oncology and Nuclear Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, University of Montreal, Montreal, Canada.

Joseph-Omer Dyer (JO)

School of Rehabilitation, Faculty of Medicine, University of Montreal, Montreal, Canada.

Jean-Sébastien Roy (JS)

Department of Rehabilitation, Faculty of Medicine, Laval University, Quebec, Canada.
Center for Interdisciplinary Research in Rehabilitation and Social Integration (CIRRIS), Quebec, Canada.

François Desmeules (F)

Maisonneuve-Rosemont Hospital Research Center, University of Montreal Affiliated Research Center, Montreal, Canada.
School of Rehabilitation, Faculty of Medicine, University of Montreal, Montreal, Canada.

Classifications MeSH