-
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jun 2016Management of rotator cuff disease often includes manual therapy and exercise, usually delivered together as components of a physical therapy intervention. This review... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Management of rotator cuff disease often includes manual therapy and exercise, usually delivered together as components of a physical therapy intervention. This review is one of a series of reviews that form an update of the Cochrane review, 'Physiotherapy interventions for shoulder pain'.
OBJECTIVES
To synthesise available evidence regarding the benefits and harms of manual therapy and exercise, alone or in combination, for the treatment of people with rotator cuff disease.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2015, Issue 3), Ovid MEDLINE (January 1966 to March 2015), Ovid EMBASE (January 1980 to March 2015), CINAHL Plus (EBSCO, January 1937 to March 2015), ClinicalTrials.gov and the WHO ICTRP clinical trials registries up to March 2015, unrestricted by language, and reviewed the reference lists of review articles and retrieved trials, to identify potentially relevant trials.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised and quasi-randomised trials, including adults with rotator cuff disease, and comparing any manual therapy or exercise intervention with placebo, no intervention, a different type of manual therapy or exercise or any other intervention (e.g. glucocorticoid injection). Interventions included mobilisation, manipulation and supervised or home exercises. Trials investigating the primary or add-on effect of manual therapy and exercise were the main comparisons of interest. Main outcomes of interest were overall pain, function, pain on motion, patient-reported global assessment of treatment success, quality of life and the number of participants experiencing adverse events.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently selected trials for inclusion, extracted the data, performed a risk of bias assessment and assessed the quality of the body of evidence for the main outcomes using the GRADE approach.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 60 trials (3620 participants), although only 10 addressed the main comparisons of interest. Overall risk of bias was low in three, unclear in 14 and high in 43 trials. We were unable to perform any meta-analyses because of clinical heterogeneity or incomplete outcome reporting. One trial compared manual therapy and exercise with placebo (inactive ultrasound therapy) in 120 participants with chronic rotator cuff disease (high quality evidence). At 22 weeks, the mean change in overall pain with placebo was 17.3 points on a 100-point scale, and 24.8 points with manual therapy and exercise (adjusted mean difference (MD) 6.8 points, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.70 to 14.30 points; absolute risk difference 7%, 1% fewer to 14% more). Mean change in function with placebo was 15.6 points on a 100-point scale, and 22.4 points with manual therapy and exercise (adjusted MD 7.1 points, 95% CI 0.30 to 13.90 points; absolute risk difference 7%, 1% to 14% more). Fifty-seven per cent (31/54) of participants reported treatment success with manual therapy and exercise compared with 41% (24/58) of participants receiving placebo (risk ratio (RR) 1.39, 95% CI 0.94 to 2.03; absolute risk difference 16% (2% fewer to 34% more). Thirty-one per cent (17/55) of participants reported adverse events with manual therapy and exercise compared with 8% (5/61) of participants receiving placebo (RR 3.77, 95% CI 1.49 to 9.54; absolute risk difference 23% (9% to 37% more). However adverse events were mild (short-term pain following treatment).Five trials (low quality evidence) found no important differences between manual therapy and exercise compared with glucocorticoid injection with respect to overall pain, function, active shoulder abduction and quality of life from four weeks up to 12 months. However, global treatment success was more common up to 11 weeks in people receiving glucocorticoid injection (low quality evidence). One trial (low quality evidence) showed no important differences between manual therapy and exercise and arthroscopic subacromial decompression with respect to overall pain, function, active range of motion and strength at six and 12 months, or global treatment success at four to eight years. One trial (low quality evidence) found that manual therapy and exercise may not be as effective as acupuncture plus dietary counselling and Phlogenzym supplement with respect to overall pain, function, active shoulder abduction and quality life at 12 weeks. We are uncertain whether manual therapy and exercise improves function more than oral non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAID), or whether combining manual therapy and exercise with glucocorticoid injection provides additional benefit in function over glucocorticoid injection alone, because of the very low quality evidence in these two trials.Fifty-two trials investigated effects of manual therapy alone or exercise alone, and the evidence was mostly very low quality. There was little or no difference in patient-important outcomes between manual therapy alone and placebo, no treatment, therapeutic ultrasound and kinesiotaping, although manual therapy alone was less effective than glucocorticoid injection. Exercise alone led to less improvement in overall pain, but not function, when compared with surgical repair for rotator cuff tear. There was little or no difference in patient-important outcomes between exercise alone and placebo, radial extracorporeal shockwave treatment, glucocorticoid injection, arthroscopic subacromial decompression and functional brace. Further, manual therapy or exercise provided few or no additional benefits when combined with other physical therapy interventions, and one type of manual therapy or exercise was rarely more effective than another.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Despite identifying 60 eligible trials, only one trial compared a combination of manual therapy and exercise reflective of common current practice to placebo. We judged it to be of high quality and found no clinically important differences between groups in any outcome. Effects of manual therapy and exercise may be similar to those of glucocorticoid injection and arthroscopic subacromial decompression, but this is based on low quality evidence. Adverse events associated with manual therapy and exercise are relatively more frequent than placebo but mild in nature. Novel combinations of manual therapy and exercise should be compared with a realistic placebo in future trials. Further trials of manual therapy alone or exercise alone 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.
Topics: Adult; Exercise Therapy; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Muscular Diseases; Musculoskeletal Manipulations; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Rotator Cuff; Shoulder Pain
PubMed: 27283590
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD012224 -
Medicine Mar 2015Many treatments for shoulder impingement syndrome (SIS) are available in clinical practice; some of which have already been compared with other treatments by various... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Many treatments for shoulder impingement syndrome (SIS) are available in clinical practice; some of which have already been compared with other treatments by various investigators. However, a comprehensive treatment comparison is lacking. Several widely used electronic databases were searched for eligible studies. The outcome measurements were the pain score and the Constant-Murley score (CMS). Direct comparisons were performed using the conventional pair-wise meta-analysis method, while a network meta-analysis based on the Bayesian model was used to calculate the results of all potentially possible comparisons and rank probabilities. Included in the meta-analysis procedure were 33 randomized controlled trials involving 2300 patients. Good agreement was demonstrated between the results of the pair-wise meta-analyses and the network meta-analyses. Regarding nonoperative treatments, with respect to the pain score, combined treatments composed of exercise and other therapies tended to yield better effects than single-intervention therapies. Localized drug injections that were combined with exercise showed better treatment effects than any other treatments, whereas worse effects were observed when such injections were used alone. Regarding the CMS, most combined treatments based on exercise also demonstrated better effects than exercise alone. Regarding surgical treatments, according to the pain score and the CMS, arthroscopic subacromial decompression (ASD) together with treatments derived from it, such as ASD combined with radiofrequency and arthroscopic bursectomy, showed better effects than open subacromial decompression (OSD) and OSD combined with the injection of platelet-leukocyte gel. Exercise therapy also demonstrated good performance. Results for inconsistency, sensitivity analysis, and meta-regression all supported the robustness and reliability of these network meta-analyses. Exercise and other exercise-based therapies, such as kinesio taping, specific exercises, and acupuncture, are ideal treatments for patients at an early stage of SIS. However, low-level laser therapy and the localized injection of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs are not recommended. For patients who have a long-term disease course, operative treatments may be considered, with standard ASD surgery preferred over arthroscopic bursectomy and the open surgical technique for subacromial decompression. Notwithstanding, the choice of surgery should be made cautiously because similar outcomes may also be achieved by the implementation of exercise therapy.
Topics: Acupuncture Therapy; Adrenal Cortex Hormones; Arthroscopy; Combined Modality Therapy; Decompression, Surgical; Exercise Therapy; Humans; Pain Measurement; Shoulder Impingement Syndrome; Treatment Outcome; Ultrasonic Therapy
PubMed: 25761173
DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000000510 -
Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and... Jun 2022FAI (femoroacetabular impingement syndrome) is a common cause of hip pain, resulting in a decreased life quality. This study aims to compare the postoperative clinical... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
PURPOSE
FAI (femoroacetabular impingement syndrome) is a common cause of hip pain, resulting in a decreased life quality. This study aims to compare the postoperative clinical outcome between arthroscopic surgery (AT) and conservative treatment (CT).
METHOD
The six studies were selected from PubMed, Embase and OVID database. The data were extracted and analyzed by RevMan5.3. Mean differences and 95% confidence intervals were calculated. RevMan5.3 was used to assess the risk of bias.
RESULT
Six observational studies were assessed. The methodological quality of the trials indicated five of six studies had a low risk of bias and one article had a high risk of bias. The differences were statistically significant between AT and CT for HOS (follow-up for 6 months), iHOT-33 (follow-up for 6 months) improvement, iHOT-33 (follow-up for 12 months) improvement, iHOT-33 (follow-up for 12 months), EQ-5D-5L index score (follow-up for 12 months) and AT showed higher benefits than CT. Meanwhile no statistically significant were found in iHOT-33 (follow-up for 6 months), EQ-5D-5L index score (follow-up for 6 months), EQ5D-VAS (follow-up for 6 months) and EQ5D-VAS (follow-up for 12 months).
CONCLUSION
AT and CT both can have clinical effects when facing FAI. In our meta-analysis, hip arthroscopy is statistically superior to conservative treatment in both long-term and short-term effects.
Topics: Activities of Daily Living; Arthroscopy; Conservative Treatment; Femoracetabular Impingement; Hip Joint; Humans; Postoperative Period; Quality of Life; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 35659016
DOI: 10.1186/s13018-022-03187-1 -
European Review For Medical and... Mar 2020Analyzing the available evidence by comparing the role of arthroscopic surgery and conservative treatment in the management of degenerative meniscopathy.
OBJECTIVE
Analyzing the available evidence by comparing the role of arthroscopic surgery and conservative treatment in the management of degenerative meniscopathy.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
A literature search was carried out on the PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus, and PEDro databases in May 2019 to identify all the randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing arthroscopic surgery to conservative management of painful but stable degenerated menisci. The quality of the RCTs was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Assessment.
RESULTS
A total of 10 studies, including 1525 patients and dealing with conservative treatment vs. arthroscopic surgery were included in this review. In eight studies the effectiveness of exercise therapy was compared to surgery; in one study the effectiveness of intra-articular steroid injection was compared to surgery; in one study the effectiveness of placebo surgery was compared to partial meniscectomy. In all studies, no significant inter-group difference in terms of knee pain and knee function were observed at any follow-up evaluation.
CONCLUSIONS
Degenerative meniscal tears, without symptoms of locking and catching, can be successfully managed by a proper regimen of physical therapy as a first line treatment. Surgical approach might be considered in case of poor response after conservative treatment.
Topics: Arthroscopy; Humans; Meniscectomy; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Steroids; Tibial Meniscus Injuries
PubMed: 32271405
DOI: 10.26355/eurrev_202003_20651 -
Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma... May 2022Aim of this systematic review was to analyze long-term results after meniscus refixation. (Review)
Review
PURPOSE
Aim of this systematic review was to analyze long-term results after meniscus refixation.
METHODS
A systematic literature search was carried out in various databases on studies on long-term results after meniscus refixation with a minimum follow-up of 7 years. Primary outcome criterion was the failure rate. Secondary outcome criteria were radiological signs of osteoarthritis (OA) and clinical scores.
RESULTS
A total of 12 retrospective case series (level 4 evidence) were identified that reported about failure rates of more than 7 years follow-up. There was no statistical difference in the failure rates between open repair, arthroscopic inside-out with posterior incisions and arthroscopic all-inside repair with flexible non-resorbable implants. In long-term studies that examined meniscal repair in children and adolescents, failure rates were significantly higher than in studies that examined adults. Six studies have shown minor radiological degenerative changes that differ little from the opposite side. The reported clinical scores at follow-up were good to very good.
CONCLUSION
This systematic review demonstrates that good long-term outcomes can be obtained in patients after isolated meniscal repair and in combination with ACL reconstruction. With regard to the chondroprotective effect of meniscus repair, the long-term failure rate is acceptable.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE
IV.
Topics: Adolescent; Adult; Anterior Cruciate Ligament Injuries; Arthroscopy; Child; Humans; Menisci, Tibial; Meniscus; Retrospective Studies; Tibial Meniscus Injuries
PubMed: 33913009
DOI: 10.1007/s00402-021-03906-z -
British Journal of Sports Medicine Dec 2018To review and compare treatments (1) after primary traumatic shoulder dislocation aimed at minimising the risk of chronic shoulder instability and (2) for chronic... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
To review and compare treatments (1) after primary traumatic shoulder dislocation aimed at minimising the risk of chronic shoulder instability and (2) for chronic post-traumatic shoulder instability.
DESIGN
Intervention systematic review with random effects network meta-analysis and direct comparison meta-analyses.
DATA SOURCES
Electronic databases (Ovid MEDLINE, Cochrane Clinical Trials Register, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Embase, Scopus, CINAHL, Ovid MEDLINE Epub Ahead of Print, In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations, Ovid MEDLINE Daily, DARE, HTA, NHSEED, Web of Science) and reference lists were searched from inception to 15 January 2018.
ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES
Randomised trials comparing any interventions either after a first-time, traumatic shoulder dislocation or chronic post-traumatic shoulder instability, with a shoulder instability, function or quality of life outcome.
RESULTS
Twenty-two randomised controlled trials were included. There was moderate quality evidence suggesting that labrum repair reduced the risk of future shoulder dislocation (relative risk 0.15; 95% CI 0.03 to 0.8, p=0.026), and that with non-surgical management 47% of patients did not experience shoulder redislocation. Very low to low-quality evidence suggested no benefit of immobilisation in external rotation versus internal rotation. There was low-quality evidence that an open procedure was superior to arthroscopic surgery for preventing shoulder redislocations.
CONCLUSIONS
There was moderate-quality evidence that half of the patients managed with physiotherapy after a first-time traumatic shoulder dislocation did not experience recurrent shoulder dislocations. If chronic instability develops, surgery could be considered. There was no evidence regarding the effectiveness of surgical management for post-traumatic chronic shoulder instability.
Topics: Humans; Joint Instability; Network Meta-Analysis; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Shoulder Dislocation
PubMed: 29936432
DOI: 10.1136/bjsports-2017-098539 -
Journal of Clinical Medicine Oct 2022Femoro-acetabular impingement (FAI) syndrome is one of the most studied conditions in sports medicine. Surgical or conservative approaches can be proposed for treating... (Review)
Review
Femoro-acetabular impingement (FAI) syndrome is one of the most studied conditions in sports medicine. Surgical or conservative approaches can be proposed for treating FAI, although the best standard of care is not established yet. Our aim is to provide a comprehensive review of the best treatment for FAI syndrome evaluating differences in outcomes between surgical and non-operative management. A literature search was carried out on the PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus, and PEDro databases, using the following keywords: "femoroacetabular impingement", "FAI", in association with "surgery", "arthroscopy", "surgical" and "conservative", "physiotherapy", "physical therapy", "rehabilitation", "exercise". Only Level I RCTs were included. Four articles were selected for this systematic review. Our analysis showed different therapeutic protocols, follow-up periods, and outcomes; however, three out of the four studies included favored surgery. Our study demonstrates beneficial effects for both arthroscopic treatment and a proper regimen of physical therapy, nevertheless a surgical approach seemed to offer superior short-term results when compared to conservative care only. Further trials with larger sample sizes and longer follow-ups are needed to assess the definitive approach to the FAI condition.
PubMed: 36233719
DOI: 10.3390/jcm11195852 -
The Knee Mar 2022Primary repair of anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) ruptures has re-emerged as a treatment option for proximal tears, with internal brace augmentation often utilised. The... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Primary repair of anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) ruptures has re-emerged as a treatment option for proximal tears, with internal brace augmentation often utilised. The aim of this study is to provide an overview of the current evidence presenting outcomes of ACL repair with internal bracing to assess the safety and efficacy of this technique.
METHODS
All studies reporting outcomes of arthroscopic primary repair of proximal ACL tears, augmented with internal bracing from 2014-2021 were included. Primary outcome was failure rate and secondary outcomes were subjective patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) and objective assessment of anteroposterior knee laxity.
RESULTS
Nine studies were included, consisting of 347 patients, mean age 32.5 years, mean minimum follow up 2 years. There were 36 failures (10.4%, CI 7.4% - 14.1%). PROMs reporting was variable across studies. KOOS, Lysholm and IKDC scores were most frequently used with mean scores > 87%. The mean Tegner and Marx scores at follow-up were 6.1 and 7.8 respectively. The mean side to side difference measured for anteroposterior knee laxity was 1.2mm.
CONCLUSIONS
This systematic review with meta-analysis shows that ACL repair with internal bracing is a safe technique for treatment of proximal ruptures, with a failure rate of 10.4%. Subjective scores and clinical laxity testing also revealed satisfactory results. This suggests that ACL repair with internal bracing should be considered as an alternative to ACL reconstruction for acute proximal tears, with the potential benefits of retained native tissue and proprioception, as well as negating the need for graft harvest.
Topics: Adult; Anterior Cruciate Ligament; Anterior Cruciate Ligament Injuries; Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction; Follow-Up Studies; Humans; Knee Joint; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 35366618
DOI: 10.1016/j.knee.2022.03.009 -
Journal of Athletic Training Feb 2018Reference/Citation: An VV, Sivakumar BS, Phan K, Trantalis J. A systematic review and meta-analysis of clinical and patient-reported outcomes following two procedures... (Review)
Review
UNLABELLED
Reference/Citation: An VV, Sivakumar BS, Phan K, Trantalis J. A systematic review and meta-analysis of clinical and patient-reported outcomes following two procedures for recurrent traumatic anterior instability of the shoulder: Latarjet procedure vs. Bankart repair. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2016;25(5):853-863.
CLINICAL QUESTION
Are clinical and patient-reported outcomes different between the Latarjet and Bankart repair stabilization procedures when performed for recurrent traumatic anterior shoulder instability?
DATA SOURCES
Ovid MEDLINE, PubMed, Cochrane databases, American College of Physicians Journal Club, and Database of Abstracts of Review of Effectiveness were searched up to June 2015. The search terms used were Bankart AND Latarjet OR Bristow.
STUDY SELECTION
Criteria used to include studies that (1) were written in English; (2) compared the outcomes of any Latarjet procedure (Bristow-Latarjet, coracoid transfer, or modified Bristow) with Bankart repair (anatomic); (3) reported a minimum of 1 outcome of recurrence, redislocation, revision, or patient-reported outcome measure; and (4) reported original data.
DATA EXTRACTION
Data presented in any format (text, table, figure) were extracted from all included studies. The quality of each study was assessed using the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) checklist. Summary statistics were reported as relative risks and weighted mean differences. Fixed-effects (the assumed treatment effect was the same across studies) and random-effects (variations in treatment effect were assumed among studies) models were tested. Heterogeneity between trials was assessed using the χ statistic, and the amount (percentage) of variation across studies due to heterogeneity was calculated using the I statistic. Forest plots were used to present pooled results.
MAIN RESULTS
After the initial search, 245 articles were identified. After we applied the inclusion criteria, a total of 8 studies reporting on 795 patients (Latarjet = 379, Bankart = 416) were included in this review. Using the National Health and Medical Research Council's level of evidence, the authors scored 7 of the studies at level III and 1 study at level II. All Latarjet procedures were performed using an open technique, whereas the Bankart procedure was performed open in 6 studies and arthroscopically in 2 studies. The demographics of the patients (age, proportion of males to females, proportion with surgery on the dominant side, and proportion of revisions) were similar between the 2 surgical procedures. Four groups reported that patients who underwent the Latarjet procedure had fewer recurrences than patients in the Bankart repair group (11.6% versus 21.1%, respectively), irrespective of whether the Bankart was performed open or arthroscopically. Similarly, 4 groups observed that the Latarjet procedure resulted in fewer postsurgical redislocations (5.0%) than the Bankart (9.5%) procedure, irrespective of whether the repair was open or arthroscopic. The authors of 7 studies noted no differences between the 2 procedures in revision rates (Latarjet: 3.4%, Bankart: 4.5%), and 8 studies demonstrated no differences in complications requiring reoperation (Latarjet: 5.0%, Bankart: 3.1%). Investigators in 7 studies used the Rowe score to measure patient-reported satisfaction and function; patients who underwent the Latarjet procedure reported better Rowe scores postsurgically than patients who underwent the Bankart repair (scores: 79.0 and 85.4, respectively). Researchers in 4 studies reported a loss of external-rotation range of motion, which was less in the Latarjet (11.5°) compared with the Bankart (20.9°) procedure. Of the 5 groups that reported return to function, a trend suggested that a greater proportion of patients who underwent the Latarjet procedure returned to work, sport, and throwing activities compared with those who underwent the Bankart repair.
CONCLUSIONS
The Latarjet procedure produced fewer recurrences, better patient-reported outcomes, and less restricted external-rotation motion than the Bankart repair.
Topics: Arthroscopy; Athletic Injuries; Humans; Joint Instability; Recurrence; Shoulder Dislocation; Shoulder Injuries; Shoulder Joint
PubMed: 29350555
DOI: 10.4085/1062-6050-232-16 -
BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders Dec 2021The septic arthritis of the hip is a complex condition characterized by a variety of clinical presentations, a challenging diagnosis and different surgical treatment... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
The septic arthritis of the hip is a complex condition characterized by a variety of clinical presentations, a challenging diagnosis and different surgical treatment options, including arthroscopy, resection arthroplasty and one and two-stage total hip replacement. Each technique reports variable results in terms of infection eradication rate. The aim of this systematic review is to compare the most relevant studies available in current literature and to assess if a better treatment outcome can be predicted based on the microbiology, history, and type of infection (active vs quiescent) of each case.
METHODS
A systematic review of the literature was performed in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines, including the studies dealing with the treatment of hip septic arthritis in adult patients. Electronic databases, namely the MEDLINE, Scopus, and Web of Science, were reviewed using a combination of following keywords "septic arthritis" AND "hip joint" OR "hip" AND "adult".
RESULTS
The total number of patients included in this review was 1236 (45% of which females), for 1238 hips. The most common pathogen isolated was Staphylococcus aureus in its Methicillin-sensitive variant ranging from 2 to 37% of cases. Negative cultures were the second most common finding. It was also differentiated the type of infection of the hip, 809 and 417 patients with active and quiescent hip infection, respectively, were analyzed. Eradication rates for two-stage revision arthroplasty ranged between 85 and 100%, for one-stage approach between 94 and 100%, while for arthroscopic debridement/lavage between 89 and 100%.
CONCLUSION
Staphylococcus aureus is the most common microorganism isolated followed by culture negative infections. Arthroscopic, one and two stage procedures can be effective in the treatment of hip septic arthritis when the indication is consistent with the type of infection retrieved.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE
IV, therapeutic study.
Topics: Arthritis, Infectious; Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip; Arthroscopy; Debridement; Female; Hip Joint; Humans; Retrospective Studies; Staphylococcal Infections; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 34856966
DOI: 10.1186/s12891-021-04843-z