• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

哪种治疗方法在治疗慢性足底筋膜炎方面更好:皮质类固醇注射、体外冲击波疗法还是射频热疗?

Which Treatment Method Is Better in the Treatment of Chronic Plantar Fasciitis: Corticosteroid Injection, Extracorporeal Shock Wave Therapy, or Radiofrequency Thermal Lesioning?

机构信息

*Department of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, Erzincan University Faculty of Medicine, Erzincan, Turkey.

†Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Giresun University Faculty of Medicine, Giresun, Turkey.

出版信息

J Am Podiatr Med Assoc. 2023 Sep-Oct;113(5). doi: 10.7547/21-049.

DOI:10.7547/21-049
PMID:37934591
Abstract

BACKGROUND

Chronic plantar fasciitis (CPF) is a common disease that has various treatment options. This study aimed to compare the effectiveness of three of these options: corticosteroid injection (CSI), extracorporeal shock wave therapy (ESWT), and radiofrequency thermal lesioning (RTL).

METHODS

The records of 229 patients treated with CSI (n = 81), ESWT (n = 76), or RTL (n = 72) were retrospectively analyzed. Visual analog scale scores, patient satisfaction-related success rates, repeated treatment rates, and initial treatment change rates were compared.

RESULTS

Mean ± SD follow-up was 19.0 ± 4.5 months. Baseline clinical characteristics, mean visual analog scale scores (before treatment and at months 3, 6, and 12), patient satisfaction and success rates (at months 6 and 12), and repeated treatment and initial treatment change rates were similar between treatment groups. No complications were observed after the treatments.

CONCLUSIONS

All three options-CSI, ESWT, and RTL-were found to be safe and effective in treating CPF, with similar outcomes up to 1 year. Use of CSIs is advantageous because it is more accessible than the other treatments. Similarly, the noninvasive nature of ESWT is glaring among other minimally invasive options. Therefore, the first-line treatment modality of CPF can be CSI or ESWT, depending on the patient's and physician's joint preference; RTL treatment should be tried in patients who do not respond to these treatments.

摘要

背景

慢性足底筋膜炎(CPF)是一种常见疾病,有多种治疗选择。本研究旨在比较其中三种治疗方法的疗效:皮质类固醇注射(CSI)、体外冲击波疗法(ESWT)和射频热疗(RTL)。

方法

回顾性分析了 229 名接受 CSI(n=81)、ESWT(n=76)或 RTL(n=72)治疗的患者的记录。比较了视觉模拟评分、与患者满意度相关的成功率、重复治疗率和初始治疗变化率。

结果

平均随访时间为 19.0±4.5 个月。治疗组之间基线临床特征、平均视觉模拟评分(治疗前、治疗后 3、6 和 12 个月)、患者满意度和成功率(治疗后 6 和 12 个月)以及重复治疗和初始治疗变化率相似。治疗后均未观察到并发症。

结论

CSI、ESWT 和 RTL 三种治疗方法均被发现安全有效,治疗 CPF 的效果相似,1 年内结果相似。CSI 的优势在于其比其他治疗方法更容易获得。同样,ESWT 的非侵入性在其他微创选择中也很明显。因此,CPF 的一线治疗方法可以是 CSI 或 ESWT,取决于患者和医生的共同偏好;对于这些治疗方法无反应的患者,可以尝试 RTL 治疗。

相似文献

1
Which Treatment Method Is Better in the Treatment of Chronic Plantar Fasciitis: Corticosteroid Injection, Extracorporeal Shock Wave Therapy, or Radiofrequency Thermal Lesioning?哪种治疗方法在治疗慢性足底筋膜炎方面更好:皮质类固醇注射、体外冲击波疗法还是射频热疗?
J Am Podiatr Med Assoc. 2023 Sep-Oct;113(5). doi: 10.7547/21-049.
2
Outcome of Corticosteroid Injections, Extracorporeal Shock Wave Therapy, and Radiofrequency Thermal Lesioning for Chronic Plantar Fasciitis.糖皮质激素注射、体外冲击波治疗和射频热疗治疗慢性足底筋膜炎的结果。
Foot Ankle Int. 2021 Jan;42(1):69-75. doi: 10.1177/1071100720949469. Epub 2020 Sep 3.
3
Ultrasonography and clinical outcome comparison of extracorporeal shock wave therapy and corticosteroid injections for chronic plantar fasciitis: A randomized controlled trial.体外冲击波疗法与皮质类固醇注射治疗慢性足底筋膜炎的超声检查与临床结果比较:一项随机对照试验
J Musculoskelet Neuronal Interact. 2018 Mar 1;18(1):47-54.
4
Clinical effects of extracorporeal shock-wave therapy and ultrasound-guided local corticosteroid injections for plantar fasciitis in adults: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.体外冲击波疗法与超声引导下局部注射皮质类固醇激素治疗成人足底筋膜炎的临床效果:一项随机对照试验的荟萃分析
Medicine (Baltimore). 2018 Dec;97(50):e13687. doi: 10.1097/MD.0000000000013687.
5
Extracorporeal shock wave therapy versus corticosteroid injection for chronic plantar fasciitis: A protocol of randomized controlled trial.体外冲击波疗法与皮质类固醇注射治疗慢性足底筋膜炎:一项随机对照试验方案
Medicine (Baltimore). 2020 May;99(19):e19920. doi: 10.1097/MD.0000000000019920.
6
Extra Corporeal Shock Wave Therapy Versus Local Corticosteroid Injection in the Treatment of Chronic Plantar Fasciitis, a Single Blinded Randomized Clinical Trial.体外冲击波疗法与局部注射皮质类固醇治疗慢性足底筋膜炎的单盲随机临床试验
Pain Med. 2016 Sep;17(9):1722-31. doi: 10.1093/pm/pnw113. Epub 2016 Jun 8.
7
Radiofrequency Thermal Lesioning and Extracorporeal Shockwave Therapy: A Comparison of Two Methods in the Treatment of Plantar Fasciitis.射频热凝术与体外冲击波疗法:两种治疗足底筋膜炎方法的比较
Foot Ankle Spec. 2017 Jun;10(3):204-209. doi: 10.1177/1938640016675408. Epub 2016 Nov 1.
8
Treatment Outcomes of Corticosteroid Injection and Extracorporeal Shock Wave Therapy as Two Primary Therapeutic Methods for Acute Plantar Fasciitis: A Prospective Randomized Clinical Trial.皮质类固醇注射和体外冲击波疗法作为急性足底筋膜炎两种主要治疗方法的治疗结果:一项前瞻性随机临床试验
J Foot Ankle Surg. 2015 Nov-Dec;54(6):1047-52. doi: 10.1053/j.jfas.2015.04.026. Epub 2015 Jul 26.
9
Effectiveness of Four Different Treatment Modalities in the Treatment of Chronic Plantar Fasciitis During a 36-Month Follow-Up Period: A Randomized Controlled Trial.四种不同治疗方式在36个月随访期内治疗慢性足底筋膜炎的有效性:一项随机对照试验。
J Foot Ankle Surg. 2018 Sep-Oct;57(5):913-918. doi: 10.1053/j.jfas.2018.03.017.
10
Comparison Between Extracorporeal Shock Wave Therapy and Local Corticosteroid Injection for Plantar Fasciitis.体外冲击波疗法与局部皮质类固醇注射治疗足底筋膜炎的比较。
Foot Ankle Int. 2020 Feb;41(2):200-205. doi: 10.1177/1071100719891111. Epub 2019 Nov 19.

引用本文的文献

1
The efficacy of ultrasound for plantar fasciitis, a systematic review and meta-analysis.超声治疗足底筋膜炎的疗效:一项系统评价与荟萃分析
Ann Med. 2025 Dec;57(1):2543056. doi: 10.1080/07853890.2025.2543056. Epub 2025 Aug 10.
2
The effect of extracorporeal shock-wave therapy on pain in patients with various tendinopathies: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized control trials.体外冲击波疗法对各种肌腱病患者疼痛的影响:一项随机对照试验的系统评价和荟萃分析
BMC Sports Sci Med Rehabil. 2024 Apr 24;16(1):93. doi: 10.1186/s13102-024-00884-8.