Li Xian, Zhang Li, Gu Shuming, Sun Jianfeng, Qin Zongshi, Yue Jiaji, Zhong Yu, Ding Ning, Gao Rui
Department of Orthopedic and Trauma Surgery, Xiyuan Hospital of China Academy of Chinese Medical Sciences, Beijing, China.
Department of Orthopaedics and Trauma Surgery, University Hospital Bonn, Bonn, Germany.
Medicine (Baltimore). 2018 Oct;97(43):e12819. doi: 10.1097/MD.0000000000012819.
Plantar fasciitis is one of the most common causes of adult heel pain. The aim of this study is to comprehensively compare the effectiveness of various therapies for plantar fasciitis using network meta-analysis.
Studies were comprehensively searched on Embase, MEDLINE via PubMed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and the Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro) up to December 4, 2017. Randomized controlled trials that used extracorporeal shock wave therapy, ultrasound, ultrasound-guided pulsed radiofrequency treatment (UG-PRF), intracorporeal pneumatic shock therapy (IPST), low-level laser therapy (LLLT), and noninvasive interactive neurostimulation (NIN) for the treatment of plantar fasciitis were included. The primary outcome is change in pain relief. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. Quality assessment was performed using the GRADE system.
Nineteen trials with 1676 patients with plantar fasciitis plantar fasciitis were included. In the pair-wise meta-analysis, radial extracorporeal shock wave therapy (RSW), LLLT, and IPST showed a significant pooled reduction in the visual analogue scale (VAS) compared with placebo at 0 to 6 weeks [mean difference (MD) = 6.60, 95% confidence interval (CI): (6.04, -7.16); MD = 2.34, 95% CI: (1.60, 3.08); MD = 2.24, 95% CI: (1.44, 3.04), respectively]. Compared with placebo, UG-PRF [MD = 2.31, 95% CI: (1.26, 3.36)] and high-intensity focused extracorporeal shock wave (H-FSW) [MD = 0.82, 95% CI: (0.20, 1.45)] showed superior pain-relieving effects at 2 to 4 months; UG-PRF [MD = 1.11, 95% CI: (0.07, 2.15)] and IPST [MD = 4.92, 95% CI: (4.11, 5.73)] showed superior effects at 6 to 12 months. In the network meta-analysis, only RSW induced significant pain reduction compared with placebo at 0 to 6 weeks [MD = 3.67, 95% CI: (0.31, 6.9)]. No significant differences were found for the 2 to 4-month and 6 to 12-month periods because of the wide 95% CIs.
We recommend treating plantar fasciitis with RSW. The commonly used ultrasound and focused extracorporeal shock wave (FSW) therapies can be considered as alternative treatment candidates. IPST, NIN, and LLLT may potentially be better alternatives, although their superiority should be confirmed by additional comprehensive evidence.PROSPERO registration number: PROSPERO (CRD42015017353).
足底筋膜炎是成人足跟痛最常见的病因之一。本研究旨在通过网状Meta分析全面比较各种治疗足底筋膜炎的疗法的有效性。
截至2017年12月4日,在Embase、通过PubMed检索的MEDLINE、Cochrane对照试验中心注册库(CENTRAL)和物理治疗证据数据库(PEDro)中全面检索研究。纳入使用体外冲击波疗法、超声、超声引导下脉冲射频治疗(UG-PRF)、体内气动冲击疗法(IPST)、低强度激光疗法(LLLT)和无创交互式神经刺激(NIN)治疗足底筋膜炎的随机对照试验。主要结局是疼痛缓解的变化。使用Cochrane偏倚风险工具评估偏倚风险。使用GRADE系统进行质量评估。
纳入了19项试验,共1676例足底筋膜炎患者。在成对Meta分析中,与安慰剂相比,在0至6周时,放射状体外冲击波疗法(RSW)、LLLT和IPST显示视觉模拟量表(VAS)有显著的汇总降低[平均差(MD)=6.60,95%置信区间(CI):(6.04,-7.16);MD=2.34,95%CI:(1.60,3.08);MD=2.24,95%CI:(1.44,3.04),分别]。与安慰剂相比,UG-PRF[MD=2.31,95%CI:(1.26,3.36)]和高强度聚焦体外冲击波(H-FSW)[MD=0.82,95%CI:(0.20,1.45)]在2至4个月时显示出更好的止痛效果;UG-PRF[MD=1.11,95%CI:(0.07,2.15)]和IPST[MD=4.92,95%CI:(4.11,5.73)]在6至12个月时显示出更好的效果。在网状Meta分析中,与安慰剂相比,仅RSW在0至6周时引起显著的疼痛减轻[MD=3.67,95%CI:(0.31,6.9)]。由于95%CI较宽,在2至4个月和6至12个月期间未发现显著差异。
我们建议用RSW治疗足底筋膜炎。常用的超声和聚焦体外冲击波(FSW)疗法可被视为替代治疗选择。IPST、NIN和LLLT可能是更好的替代方法,尽管它们的优越性应由更多的综合证据来证实。国际前瞻性系统评价注册库注册号:PROSPERO(CRD42015017353)。