-
Journal of Foot and Ankle Research 2019Morton's neuroma (MN) is a compressive neuropathy of the common plantar digital nerve. It is a common compressive neuropathy often causing significant pain which limits... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Morton's neuroma (MN) is a compressive neuropathy of the common plantar digital nerve. It is a common compressive neuropathy often causing significant pain which limits footwear choices and weight bearing activities. This paper aims to review non-surgical interventions for MN, to evaluate the evidence base for the clinical management of MN.
METHODS
Electronic biomedical databases (CINAHL, EMBASE, MEDLINE and Cochrane) were searched to January 2018 for studies evaluating the effectiveness of non-surgical interventions for Morton's neuroma. Outcome measures of interest were treatment success rate (SR) (binary) and pain as measured using 100-point visual analogue scale (VAS) (continuous). Studies with and without control groups were included and were evaluated for methodological quality using the Downs and Black Quality Index. Results from randomised controlled trials (RCT) were compared between-groups, and case series were compared pre- versus post-treatment. Effect estimates are presented as odds ratios (OR) for binary data or mean differences (MD) for continuous data. Random effects models were used to pool effect estimates across studies where similar treatments were used. Heterogeneity was assessed using the statistic.
RESULTS
A total of 25 studies met the inclusion criteria, seven RCTs and 18 pre/post case series. Eight different interventions were identified, with corticosteroid or sclerosing injections being the most often reported (seven studies each). Results from a meta-analysis of two RCTs found corticosteroid injection decreased pain more than control on VAS (WMD: -5.3, 95%CI: -7.5 to - 3.2). Other RCTs reported efficacy of: manipulation/mobilisation versus control (MD: -15.3, 95%CI: -29.6 to - 1.0); extracorporeal shockwave therapy versus control (MD: -5.9, 95%CI: -21.9 to 10.1). Treatment success was assessed for extracorporeal shockwave therapy versus control (OR: 0.3, 95%CI: 0.0 to 7.1); and corticosteroid injection vs footwear/padding (OR: 6.0, 95%CI: 1.9 to 19.2). Sclerosing and Botox injections, radiofrequency ablation and cryoneurolysis have been investigated by case series studies, however these were of limited methodological quality.
CONCLUSIONS
Corticosteroid injections and manipulation/mobilisation are the two interventions with the strongest evidence for pain reduction, however high-quality evidence for a gold standard intervention was not found. Although the evidence base is expanding, further high quality RCTs are needed.
Topics: Foot Orthoses; Glucocorticoids; Humans; Morton Neuroma; Musculoskeletal Manipulations; Pain Management; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Sclerotherapy
PubMed: 30809275
DOI: 10.1186/s13047-019-0320-7 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Mar 2020Shock wave therapy has seen widespread use since the 1990s to treat various musculoskeletal disorders including rotator cuff disease, but evidence of its efficacy... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Shock wave therapy has seen widespread use since the 1990s to treat various musculoskeletal disorders including rotator cuff disease, but evidence of its efficacy remains equivocal.
OBJECTIVES
To determine the benefits and harms of shock wave therapy for rotator cuff disease, with or without calcification, and to establish its usefulness in the context of other available treatment options.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid Embase, CENTRAL, ClinicalTrials.gov and the WHO ICTRP up to November 2019, with no restrictions on language. We reviewed the reference lists of retrieved trials to identify potentially relevant trials.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and controlled clinical trials (CCTs) that used quasi-randomised methods to allocate participants, investigating participants with rotator cuff disease with or without calcific deposits. We included trials of comparisons of extracorporeal or radial shock wave therapy versus any other intervention. Major outcomes were pain relief greater than 30%, mean pain score, function, patient-reported global assessment of treatment success, quality of life, number of participants experiencing adverse events and number of withdrawals due to adverse events.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently selected studies for inclusion, extracted data and assessed the certainty of evidence using GRADE. The primary comparison was shock wave therapy compared to placebo.
MAIN RESULTS
Thirty-two trials (2281 participants) met our inclusion criteria. Most trials (25) included participants with rotator cuff disease and calcific deposits, five trials included participants with rotator cuff disease and no calcific deposits, and two trials included a mixed population of participants with and without calcific deposits. Twelve trials compared shock wave therapy to placebo, 11 trials compared high-dose shock wave therapy (0.2 mJ/mm² to 0.4 mJ/mm² and above) to low-dose shock wave therapy. Single trials compared shock wave therapy to ultrasound-guided glucocorticoid needling, ultrasound-guided hyaluronic acid injection, transcutaneous electric nerve stimulation (TENS), no treatment or exercise; dual session shock wave therapy to single session therapy; and different delivery methods of shock wave therapy. Our main comparison was shock wave therapy versus placebo and results are reported for the 3 month follow up. All trials were susceptible to bias; including selection (74%), performance (62%), detection (62%), and selective reporting (45%) biases. No trial measured participant-reported pain relief of 30%. However, in one trial (74 participants), at 3 months follow up, 14/34 participants reported pain relief of 50% or greater with shock wave therapy compared with 15/40 with placebo (risk ratio (RR) 1.10, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.62 to 1.94); low-quality evidence (downgraded for bias and imprecision). Mean pain (0 to 10 scale, higher scores indicate more pain) was 3.02 points in the placebo group and 0.78 points better (0.17 better to 1.4 better; clinically important change was 1.5 points) with shock wave therapy (9 trials, 608 participants), moderate-quality evidence (downgraded for bias). Mean function (scale 0 to 100, higher scores indicate better function) was 66 points with placebo and 7.9 points better (1.6 better to 14 better, clinically important difference 10 points) with shock wave therapy (9 trials, 612 participants), moderate-quality evidence (downgraded for bias). Participant-reported success was reported by 58/150 people in shock wave therapy group compared with 35/137 people in placebo group (RR 1.59, 95% CI 0.87 to 2.91; 6 trials, 287 participants), low-quality evidence (downgraded for bias and imprecision). None of the trials measured quality of life. Withdrawal rate or adverse event rates may not differ between extracorporeal shock wave therapy and placebo, but we are uncertain due to the small number of events. There were 11/34 withdrawals in the extracorporeal shock wave therapy group compared with 13/40 withdrawals in the placebo group (RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.43 to 1.31; 7 trials, 581 participants) low-quality evidence (downgraded for bias and imprecision); and 41/156 adverse events with extracorporeal shock wave therapy compared with 10/139 adverse events in the placebo group (RR 3.61, 95% CI 2.00 to 6.52; 5 trials, 295 participants) low-quality evidence (downgraded for bias and imprecision). Subgroup analyses indicated that there were no between-group differences in pain and function outcomes in participants who did or did not have calcific deposits in the rotator cuff.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Based upon the currently available low- to moderate-certainty evidence, there were very few clinically important benefits of shock wave therapy, and uncertainty regarding its safety. Wide clinical diversity and varying treatment protocols means that we do not know whether or not some trials tested subtherapeutic doses, possibly underestimating any potential benefits. Further trials of extracorporeal shock wave therapy for rotator cuff disease should be based upon a strong rationale and consideration of whether or not they would alter the conclusions of this review. A standard dose and treatment protocol should be decided upon before further research is conducted. Development of a core set of outcomes for trials of rotator cuff disease and other shoulder disorders would also facilitate our ability to synthesise the evidence.
Topics: Calcinosis; Exercise Therapy; Extracorporeal Shockwave Therapy; Glucocorticoids; Humans; Hyaluronic Acid; Middle Aged; Muscular Diseases; Patient Dropouts; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Rotator Cuff; Shoulder Pain; Transcutaneous Electric Nerve Stimulation; Viscosupplements
PubMed: 32128761
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD008962.pub2 -
Diabetes/metabolism Research and Reviews Mar 2024This is the 2023 International Working Group on the Diabetic Foot guideline on the prevention of foot ulcers in persons with diabetes, which updates the 2019 guideline....
AIMS
This is the 2023 International Working Group on the Diabetic Foot guideline on the prevention of foot ulcers in persons with diabetes, which updates the 2019 guideline. This guideline is targeted at clinicians and other healthcare professionals.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
We followed the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations methodology to devise clinical questions and critically important outcomes in the PICO format, to conduct a systematic review of the medical-scientific literature including, where appropriate, meta-analyses, and to write recommendations and their rationale. The recommendations are based on the quality of evidence found in the systematic review, expert opinion where (sufficient) evidence was not available, and a weighing of the desirable and undesirable effects of an intervention, as well as patient preferences, costs, equity, feasibility and applicability.
RESULTS
We recommend screening a person with diabetes at very low risk of foot ulceration annually for the loss of protective sensation and peripheral artery disease, and screening persons at higher risk at higher frequencies for additional risk factors. For preventing a foot ulcer, educate persons at-risk about appropriate foot self-care, educate not to walk without suitable foot protection, and treat any pre-ulcerative lesion on the foot. Educate moderate-to-high risk people with diabetes to wear properly fitting, accommodative, therapeutic footwear, and consider coaching them to monitor foot skin temperature. Prescribe therapeutic footwear that has a demonstrated plantar pressure relieving effect during walking, to help prevent plantar foot ulcer recurrence. Consider advising people at low-to-moderate risk to undertake a, preferably supervised, foot-ankle exercise programme to reduce ulcer risk factors, and consider communicating that a total increase in weight-bearing activity of 1000 steps/day is likely safe with regards to risk of ulceration. In people with non-rigid hammertoe with pre-ulcerative lesion, consider flexor tendon tenotomy. We suggest not to use a nerve decompression procedure to help prevent foot ulcers. Provide integrated foot care for moderate-to-high-risk people with diabetes to help prevent (recurrence of) ulceration.
CONCLUSIONS
These recommendations should help healthcare professionals to provide better care for persons with diabetes at risk of foot ulceration, to increase the number of ulcer-free days and reduce the patient and healthcare burden of diabetes-related foot disease.
Topics: Humans; Diabetic Foot; Foot Ulcer; Risk Factors; Evidence-Based Medicine; Diabetes Mellitus
PubMed: 37302121
DOI: 10.1002/dmrr.3651 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Feb 2024Morton's neuroma (MN) is a painful neuropathy resulting from a benign enlargement of the common plantar digital nerve that occurs commonly in the third webspace and,... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Morton's neuroma (MN) is a painful neuropathy resulting from a benign enlargement of the common plantar digital nerve that occurs commonly in the third webspace and, less often, in the second webspace of the foot. Symptoms include burning or shooting pain in the webspace that extends to the toes, or the sensation of walking on a pebble. These impact on weight-bearing activities and quality of life.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the benefits and harms of interventions for MN.
SEARCH METHODS
On 11 July 2022, we searched CENTRAL, CINAHL Plus EBSCOhost, ClinicalTrials.gov, Cochrane Neuromuscular Specialised Register, Embase Ovid, MEDLINE Ovid, and WHO ICTRP. We checked the bibliographies of identified randomised trials and systematic reviews and contacted trial authors as needed.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included all randomised, parallel-group trials (RCTs) of any intervention compared with placebo, control, or another intervention for MN. We included trials where allocation occurred at the level of the individual or the foot (clustered data). We included trials that confirmed MN through symptoms, a clinical test, and an ultrasound scan (USS) or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI).
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We used standard Cochrane methodological procedures. We assessed bias using Cochrane's risk of bias 2 tool (RoB 2) and assessed the certainty of the evidence using the GRADE framework.
MAIN RESULTS
We included six RCTs involving 373 participants with MN. We judged risk of bias as having 'some concerns' across most outcomes. No studies had a low risk of bias across all domains. Post-intervention time points reported were: three months to less than 12 months from baseline (nonsurgical outcomes), and 12 months or longer from baseline (surgical outcomes). The primary outcome was pain, and secondary outcomes were function, satisfaction or health-related quality of life (HRQoL), and adverse events (AE). Nonsurgical treatments Corticosteroid and local anaesthetic injection (CS+LA) versus local anaesthetic injection (LA) Two RCTs compared CS+LA versus LA. At three to six months: • CS+LA may result in little to no difference in pain (mean difference (MD) -6.31 mm, 95% confidence interval (CI) -14.23 to 1.61; P = 0.12, I = 0%; 2 studies, 157 participants; low-certainty evidence). (Assessed via a pain visual analogue scale (VAS; 0 to 100 mm); a lower score indicated less pain.) • CS+LA may result in little to no difference in function when compared with LA (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.30, 95% CI -0.61 to 0.02; P = 0.06, I = 0%; 2 studies, 157 participants; low-certainty evidence). (Function was measured using: the American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society Lesser Toe Metatarsophalangeal-lnterphalangeal Scale (AOFAS; 0 to 100 points) - we transformed the scale so that a lower score indicated improved function - and the Manchester Foot Pain and Disability Schedule (MFPDS; 0 to 100 points), where a lower score indicated improved function.) • CS+LA probably results in little to no difference in HRQoL when compared to LA (MD 0.07, 95% CI -0.03 to 0.17; P = 0.19; 1 study, 122 participants; moderate-certainty evidence), and CS+LA may not increase satisfaction (risk ratio (RR) 1.08, 95% CI 0.63 to 1.85; P = 0.78; 1 study, 35 participants; low-certainty evidence). (Assessed using the EuroQol five dimension instrument (EQ-5D; 0-1 point); a higher score indicated improved HRQoL.) • The evidence is very uncertain about the effects of CS+LA on AE when compared with LA (RR 9.84, 95% CI 1.28 to 75.56; P = 0.03, I = 0%; 2 studies, 157 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Adverse events for CS+LA included mild skin atrophy (3.9%), hypopigmentation of the skin (3.9%) and plantar fat pad atrophy (2.6%); no adverse events were observed with LA. Ultrasound-guided (UG) CS+LA versus non-ultrasound-guided (NUG) CS+LA Two RCTs compared UG CS+LA versus NUG CS+LA. At six months: • UG CS+LA probably reduces pain when compared with NUG CS+LA (MD -15.01 mm, 95% CI -27.88 to -2.14; P = 0.02, I = 0%; 2 studies, 116 feet; moderate-certainty evidence). (Assessed with a pain VAS.) • UG CS+LA probably increases function when compared with NUG CS+LA (SMD -0.47, 95% CI -0.84 to -0.10; P = 0.01, I = 0%; 2 studies, 116 feet; moderate-certainty evidence). We do not know of any established minimum clinical important difference (MCID) for the scales that assessed function, specifically, the MFPDS and the Manchester-Oxford Foot Questionnaire (MOXFQ; 0 to 100 points; a lower score indicated improved function.) • UG CS+LA may increase satisfaction compared with NUG CS+LA (risk ratio (RR) 1.71, 95% CI 1.19 to 2.44; P = 0.003, I = 15%; 2 studies, 114 feet; low-certainty evidence). • HRQoL was not measured. • UG CS+LA may result in little to no difference in AE when compared with NUG CS+LA (RR 0.42, 95% CI 0.12 to 1.39; P = 0.15, I = 0%; 2 studies, 116 feet; low-certainty evidence). AE included depigmentation or fat atrophy for UG CS+LA (4.9%) and NUG CS+LA (12.7%). Surgical treatments Plantar incision neurectomy (PN) versus dorsal incision neurectomy (DN) One study compared PN versus DN. At 34 months (mean; range 28 to 42 months), PN may result in little to no difference for satisfaction (RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.87 to 1.28; P = 0.58; 1 study, 73 participants; low-certainty evidence), or for AE (RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.32 to 2.85; P = 0.93; 1 study, 75 participants; low-certainty evidence) compared with DN. AE for PN included hypertrophic scaring (11.4%), foreign body reaction (2.9%); AE for DN included missed nerve (2.5%), artery resected (2.5%), wound infection (2.5%), postoperative dehiscence (2.5%), deep vein thrombosis (2.5%) and reoperation with plantar incision due to intolerable pain (5%). The data reported for pain and function were not suitable for analysis. HRQoL was not measured.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Although there are many interventions for MN, few have been assessed in RCTs. There is low-certainty evidence that CS+LA may result in little to no difference in pain or function, and moderate-certainty evidence that UG CS+LA probably reduces pain and increases function for people with MN. Future trials should improve methodology to increase certainty of the evidence, and use optimal sample sizes to decrease imprecision.
Topics: Humans; Morton Neuroma; Anesthetics, Local; Quality of Life; Pain; Atrophy
PubMed: 38334217
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD014687.pub2 -
Current Diabetes Reviews 2023Diabetic peripheral neuropathy is a severe complication of type 2 diabetes mellitus. The most common symptoms are neuropathic pain and altered sensorium due to damage to...
Effectiveness of Photobiomodulation Therapy on Neuropathic Pain, Nerve Conduction and Plantar Pressure Distribution in Diabetic Peripheral Neuropathy - A Systematic Review.
BACKGROUND
Diabetic peripheral neuropathy is a severe complication of type 2 diabetes mellitus. The most common symptoms are neuropathic pain and altered sensorium due to damage to small nerve fibers. Altered plantar pressure distribution is also a major risk factor in diabetic peripheral neuropathy, leading to diabetic foot ulcers.
OBJECTIVE
The objective of this systematic review was to analyze the various studies involving photobiomodulation therapy on neuropathic pain and plantar pressure distribution in diabetic peripheral neuropathy.
METHODS
We conducted a systematic review (PubMed, Web of Science, CINAHL, and Cochrane) to summarise the evidence on photobiomodulation therapy for Diabetic Peripheral Neuropathy with type 2 diabetes mellitus. Randomized and non-randomized studies were included in the review.
RESULTS
This systematic review included eight studies in which photobiomodulation therapy showed improvement in neuropathic pain and nerve conduction velocity. It also reduces plantar pressure distribution, which is a high risk for developing foot ulcers.
CONCLUSION
We conclude that photobiomodulation therapy is an effective, non-invasive, and costefficient means to improve neuropathic pain and altered plantar pressure distribution in diabetic peripheral neuropathy.
Topics: Humans; Diabetic Neuropathies; Low-Level Light Therapy; Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2; Neuralgia; Neural Conduction
PubMed: 37622461
DOI: 10.2174/1573399818666220429085256 -
Multiple Sclerosis and Related Disorders Feb 2022Lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTSs) are common in patients with multiple sclerosis (MS). Percutaneous posterior tibial nerve stimulation (PTNS) is a minimally invasive... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Percutaneous posterior tibial nerve stimulation (PTNS) for lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTSs) treatment in patients with multiple sclerosis (MS): A systematic review and meta-analysis.
BACKGROUND
Lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTSs) are common in patients with multiple sclerosis (MS). Percutaneous posterior tibial nerve stimulation (PTNS) is a minimally invasive treatment which is considered to be effective for patients who suffer from LUTS symptoms. In previous studies, the endpoints of treatment reported differently. So, we designed this systematic review and meta-analysis to estimate pooled efficacy of PTNS based on different assessment methods.
METHODS
We systematically searched PubMed, Scopus, EMBASE, Web of Science, and google scholar. We also searched the gray literature including references of the included studies, and conference abstracts which were published up to May 2021. The search strategy included the MeSH and text words as (((Tibial Nerves) OR Posterior Tibial Nerve) OR (Posterior Tibial Nerves) OR (Medial Plantar Nerves) OR (Medial Plantar Nerve) OR (tibial Nerve Stimulation) OR (Trans-Cutaneous Tibial Nerve Stimulation) OR (Percutaneous Tibial Nerve Stimulation) OR (Cutaneous Tibial Nerve Stimulation) AND ((Multiple Sclerosis OR Sclerosis, Multiple) OR Sclerosis, Disseminated) OR Disseminated Sclerosis) OR MS (Multiple Sclerosis)) OR Multiple Sclerosis, Acute Fulminating).Two independent researchers independently evaluated the articles.
RESULTS
We found 2430 articles by literature search, after deleting duplicates 2027 remained. Eight articles remained for meta-analysis The pooled SMD of post voiding residual (PVR) (post-treatment - pre-treatment) was -0.75 (95%CI:-0.93, -0.56)(I=0, p = 0.67). The pooled SMD of voiding volume (post-treatment - pre-treatment) was 1.21 (95% CI:0.94-1.49) (I:0%, p = 0.4). The pooled SMD of nocturia (post-treatment - pre-treatment) was -1.10 (95% CI:-1.33, -0.87) (I:86.4%, p<0.001). The pooled SMD of leakage per day (post-treatment - pre-treatment) was -0.69 (95% CI:-0.93, -0.45) (I:84.3%, p<0.001). The pooled frequency of responders was 66%(95% CI:59%-73%)(I:0).
CONCLUSION
The results of this systematic review and meta-analysis show that PTNS in effective in treating LUTS in patients with MS.
Topics: Disease Progression; Humans; Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms; Multiple Sclerosis; Tibial Nerve; Transcutaneous Electric Nerve Stimulation; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 35216773
DOI: 10.1016/j.msard.2021.103392 -
BMJ Open Diabetes Research & Care May 2021There is growing evidence of excess peripheral neuropathy in pre-diabetes. We aimed to determine its prevalence, including the impact of diagnostic methodology on... (Review)
Review
There is growing evidence of excess peripheral neuropathy in pre-diabetes. We aimed to determine its prevalence, including the impact of diagnostic methodology on prevalence rates, through a systematic review conducted according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. A comprehensive electronic bibliographic search was performed in MEDLINE, EMBASE, PubMed, Web of Science and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials from inception to June 1, 2020. Two reviewers independently selected studies, extracted data and assessed risk of bias. An evaluation was undertaken by method of neuropathy assessment. After screening 1784 abstracts and reviewing 84 full-text records, 29 studies (9351 participants) were included. There was a wide range of prevalence estimates (2%-77%, IQR: 6%-34%), but the majority of studies (n=21, 72%) reported a prevalence ≥10%. The three highest prevalence estimates of 77% (95% CI: 54% to 100%), 71% (95% CI: 55% to 88%) and 66% (95% CI: 53% to 78%) were reported using plantar thermography, multimodal quantitative sensory testing and nerve conduction tests, respectively. In general, studies evaluating small nerve fiber parameters yielded a higher prevalence of peripheral neuropathy. Due to a variety of study populations and methods of assessing neuropathy, there was marked heterogeneity in the prevalence estimates. Most studies reported a higher prevalence of peripheral neuropathy in pre-diabetes, primarily of a small nerve fiber origin, than would be expected in the background population. Given the marked rise in pre-diabetes, further consideration of targeting screening in this population is required. Development of risk-stratification tools may facilitate earlier interventions.
Topics: Humans; Peripheral Nervous System Diseases; Prediabetic State; Prevalence; Research Design
PubMed: 34006607
DOI: 10.1136/bmjdrc-2020-002040 -
Journal of Reconstructive Microsurgery Jan 2020Soft tissue reconstruction of the foot represents a complex reconstructive challenge given the unique anatomical properties of the glabrous plantar skin. For large...
BACKGROUND
Soft tissue reconstruction of the foot represents a complex reconstructive challenge given the unique anatomical properties of the glabrous plantar skin. For large soft tissue defects and/or complex injuries, free tissue transfer is often the optimal reconstructive modality. The decision to pursue a neurotized free flap remains controversial and an area of debate. Given the trend toward increasing use of neurotized free flaps, we performed a systematic review to determine if nerve coaptation is a beneficial adjunct to free tissue transfer.
METHODS
A systematic search of the English literature using PubMed and Web of Science was performed. Studies were identified between 1985 and 2018. Manuscripts were eligible if they contained original clinical outcomes research of patients who underwent free tissue transfer to the foot or heel with neurotization.
RESULTS
A total of 189 studies were identified with initial screening and 19 studies were included in our analysis. A total of 175 patients underwent free flap reconstruction to the foot; of these, 107 patients had a nerve coaptation performed. Patients who underwent neurotization had improved sensory characteristics (two-point discrimination, light touch, and pain sensation), quicker return to ambulation and activities of daily living, and decreased ulcer formation compared with those who did not. Overall complications were infrequent, with ulceration being the most common.
CONCLUSION
Neurotized free flaps appear to have an overall decreased rate of ulceration, improved sensory discrimination, and quicker return to ambulation/activities of daily living in comparison to nonneurotized free flaps. However, when examining free anterolateral thigh (ALT) and free medial plantar artery (MPA) fasciocutaneous flaps, durability (i.e., frequency of ulcer formation) and functionality (ambulation and return to activities of daily living) do not appear to be significantly different between neurotized and nonneurotized flaps.
Topics: Foot; Foot Injuries; Free Tissue Flaps; Humans; Microsurgery; Nerve Transfer; Plastic Surgery Procedures; Soft Tissue Injuries
PubMed: 31450252
DOI: 10.1055/s-0039-1694734 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jun 2017Plantar heel pain, commonly resulting from plantar fasciitis, often results in significant morbidity. Treatment options include nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Plantar heel pain, commonly resulting from plantar fasciitis, often results in significant morbidity. Treatment options include nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), orthoses, physical therapy, physical agents (e.g. extracorporeal shock wave therapy (ESWT), laser) and invasive procedures including steroid injections.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effects (benefits and harms) of injected corticosteroids for treating plantar heel pain in adults.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Bone, Joint and Muscle Trauma Group Specialised Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (the Cochrane Library), MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, clinical trials registries and conference proceedings. Latest search: 27 March 2017.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised and quasi-randomised trials of corticosteroid injections in the treatment of plantar heel pain in adults were eligible for inclusion.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
At least two review authors independently selected studies, assessed risk of bias and extracted data. We calculated risk ratios (RRs) for dichotomous outcomes and mean differences (MDs) for continuous outcome measures. We used a fixed-effect model unless heterogeneity was significant, when a random-effects model was considered. We assessed the overall quality of evidence for individual outcomes using the GRADE approach.
MAIN RESULTS
We included a total of 39 studies (36 randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and 3 quasi-RCTs) that involved a total of 2492 adults. Most studies were small (median = 59 participants). Participants' mean ages ranged from 34 years to 59 years. When reported, most participants had heel pain for several months. The trials were usually conducted in outpatient specialty clinics of tertiary care hospitals in 17 countries. Steroid injection was given with a local anaesthetic agent in 34 trials. Follow-up was from one month to over two years. With one exception, trials were assessed at high risk of bias in one or more domains, mostly relating to lack of blinding, including lack of confirmation of allocation concealment. With two exceptions, we rated the available evidence as very low quality, implying in each case that we are 'very uncertain about the estimate'.The 39 trials covered 18 comparisons, with six of the seven trials with three or four groups providing evidence towards two comparisons.Eight trials (724 participants) compared steroid injection versus placebo or no treatment. Steroid injection may lead to lower heel pain visual analogue scores (VAS) (0 to 100; higher scores = worse pain) in the short-term (< 1 month) (MD -6.38, 95% CI -11.13 to -1.64; 350 participants; 5 studies; I² = 65%; low quality evidence). Based on a minimal clinically significant difference (MCID) of 8 for average heel pain, the 95% CI includes a marginal clinical benefit. This potential benefit was diminished when data were restricted to three placebo-controlled trials. Steroid injection made no difference to average heel pain in the medium-term (1 to 6 months follow-up) (MD -3.47, 95% CI -8.43 to 1.48; 382 participants; 6 studies; I² = 40%; low quality evidence). There was very low quality evidence for no effect on function in the medium-term and for an absence of serious adverse events (219 participants, 4 studies). No studies reported on other adverse events, such as post-injection pain, and on return to previous activity. There was very low quality evidence for fewer treatment failures (defined variously as persistent heel pain at 8 weeks, steroid injection at 12 weeks, and unrelieved pain at 6 months) after steroid injection.The available evidence for other comparisons was rated as very low quality. We are therefore very uncertain of the estimates for the relative effects on people with heel pain of steroids compared with other interventions in:1. Tibial nerve block with anaesthetic (2 trials); orthoses (4 trials); oral NSAIDs (2 trials); and intensive physiotherapy (1 trial).2. Physical modalities: ESWT (5 trials); laser (2 trials); and radiation therapy (1 trial).3. Other invasive procedures: locally injectable NSAID (1 trial); platelet-rich plasma injections (5 trials); autologous blood injections (2 trials); botulinum toxin injections (2 trials); cryopreserved human amniotic membrane injection (1 trial); localised peppering with a needle (1 trial); dry needling (1 trial); and mini scalpel needle release (1 trial).We are also uncertain about the estimates from trials testing different techniques of local steroid injection: ultrasonography-guided versus palpation-guided (5 trials); and scintigraphy-guided versus palpation-guided (1 trial).An exploratory analysis involving pooling data from 21 trials reporting on adverse events revealed two ruptures of plantar fascia (reported in 1 trial) and three injection site infections (reported in 2 trials) in 699 participants allocated to steroid injection study arms. Five trials reported a total of 27 participants with less serious short-term adverse events in the 699 participants allocated steroid injection study arms. Reported treatments were analgesia, ice or both. Given the high risk of selective reporting for these outcomes and imprecision, this evidence was rated at very low quality.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
We found low quality evidence that local steroid injections compared with placebo or no treatment may slightly reduce heel pain up to one month but not subsequently. The available evidence for other outcomes of this comparison was very low quality. Where available, the evidence from comparisons of steroid injections with other interventions used to treat heel pain and of different methods of guiding the injection was also very low quality. Although serious adverse events relating to steroid injection were rare, these were under-reported and a higher risk cannot be ruled out.Further research should focus on establishing the effects (benefits and harms) of injected steroids compared with placebo in typical clinical settings, subsequent to a course of unsuccessful conservative therapy. Ideally, this should be preceded by research, including patient involvement, aimed to obtain consensus on the priority questions for treating plantar heel pain.
Topics: Adrenal Cortex Hormones; Adult; Anesthetics, Local; Foot Diseases; Heel; Humans; Middle Aged; Non-Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Pain; Pain Measurement; Publication Bias; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Treatment Failure
PubMed: 28602048
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD009348.pub2 -
Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) Feb 2023This systematic review documents the protocol characteristics of studies that used neuromuscular electrical stimulation protocols (NMES) on the plantar flexors [through...
This systematic review documents the protocol characteristics of studies that used neuromuscular electrical stimulation protocols (NMES) on the plantar flexors [through triceps surae (TS) or tibial nerve (TN) stimulation] to stimulate afferent pathways. The review was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) statement, was registered to PROSPERO (ID: CRD42022345194) and was funded by the Greek General Secretariat for Research and Technology (ERA-NET NEURON JTC 2020). Included were original research articles on healthy adults, with NMES interventions applied on TN or TS or both. Four databases (Cochrane Library, PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science) were systematically searched, in addition to a manual search using the citations of included studies. Quality assessment was conducted on 32 eligible studies by estimating the risk of bias with the checklist of the Effective Public Health Practice Project Quality Assessment Tool. Eighty-seven protocols were analyzed, with descriptive statistics. Compared to TS, TN stimulation has been reported in a wider range of frequencies (5-100, vs. 20-200 Hz) and normalization methods for the contraction intensity. The pulse duration ranged from 0.2 to 1 ms for both TS and TN protocols. It is concluded that with increasing popularity of NMES protocols in intervention and rehabilitation, future studies may use a wider range of stimulation attributes, to stimulate motor neurons via afferent pathways, but, on the other hand, additional studies may explore new protocols, targeting for more optimal effectiveness. Furthermore, future studies should consider methodological issues, such as stimulation efficacy (e.g., positioning over the motor point) and reporting of level of discomfort during the application of NMES protocols to reduce the inherent variability of the results.
Topics: Adult; Animals; Humans; Afferent Pathways; Checklist; Electric Stimulation; Fishes; Leg; Tibial Nerve
PubMed: 36850945
DOI: 10.3390/s23042347