1Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Shin Kong Wu Ho-Su Memorial Hospital, Taipei, TAIWAN; 2School of Medicine, Fu Jen Catholic University, New Taipei City, TAIWAN; 3Graduate Institute of Biomedical Engineering, National Taiwan University of Science and Technology, Taipei, TAIWAN; 4Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Tri-Service General Hospital, National Defense Medical Center, Taipei, TAIWAN; 5Department and Graduate Institute of Physical Education and Health, University of Taipei, Taipei, TAIWAN; and 6Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Cardinal Tien Hospital, New Taipei City, TAIWAN.
Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2013 Dec;45(12):2205-13. doi: 10.1249/MSS.0b013e31829b183c.
Although ultrasound (US)-guided subacromial injection has shown increased accuracy in needle placement, whether US-guided injection produces better clinical outcome is still controversial. Therefore, this study aimed to compare the efficacy of subacromial corticosteroid injection under US guidance with palpation-guided subacromial injection in patients with chronic subacromial bursitis.
Patients with chronic subacromial bursitis were randomized to a US-guided injection group and a palpation-guided injection group. The subjects in each group were injected with a mixture of 0.5 mL dexamethasone suspension and 3 mL lidocaine into the subacromial bursa. The primary outcome measures were the visual analog scale for pain and active and passive ranges of motion of the affected shoulder. Secondary outcome measures were the Shoulder Pain and Disability Index, the Shoulder Disability Questionnaire, and the 36-item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36). The primary outcome measures were evaluated before, immediately, 1 wk, and 1 month after the injection; the secondary outcome measures were evaluated before, 1 wk, and 1 month after the injection.
Of the 145 subjects screened, 46 in each group completed the study. Significantly greater improvement in passive shoulder abduction and in physical functioning and vitality scores on the SF-36 were observed in the US-guided group. The pre- and postinjection within-group comparison revealed significant improvement in the visual analog scale for pain and range of motion, as well as in the Shoulder Pain and Disability Index, Shoulder Disability Questionnaire, and SF-36 scores, in both groups.
The US-guided subacromial injection technique produced significantly greater improvements in passive shoulder abduction and in some items of the SF-36. US is effective in guiding the needle into the subacromial bursa in patients with chronic subacromial bursitis.
尽管超声(US)引导下肩峰下注射在提高进针准确性方面显示出了优势,但 US 引导下注射是否能产生更好的临床效果仍存在争议。因此,本研究旨在比较超声引导下与触诊引导下肩峰下滑囊内注射治疗慢性肩峰下滑囊炎的疗效。
将慢性肩峰下滑囊炎患者随机分为超声引导下注射组和触诊引导下注射组。每组患者均将 0.5 mL 地塞米松混悬液和 3 mL 利多卡因混合后注入肩峰下滑囊。主要观察指标为疼痛的视觉模拟评分(VAS)以及患肩主动和被动活动范围。次要观察指标为肩痛及残疾指数(SPADI)、肩关节残疾问卷(DASH)和 36 项简明健康调查问卷(SF-36)。主要观察指标在注射前、即刻、1 周和 1 个月时进行评估;次要观察指标在注射前、1 周和 1 个月时进行评估。
在筛选的 145 例患者中,每组 46 例患者完成了研究。与触诊引导组相比,超声引导组患者的被动肩关节外展度以及 SF-36 中身体机能和活力评分的改善更为显著。组内注射前后比较显示,两组患者的 VAS 评分和关节活动度均显著改善,且 SPADI、DASH 和 SF-36 评分也显著改善。
超声引导下肩峰下注射技术可显著改善被动肩关节外展度以及 SF-36 的某些项目。超声可有效引导针尖进入慢性肩峰下滑囊炎患者的肩峰下滑囊内。