Liang Chun-Wei, Cheng Hsiao-Yi, Lee Yu-Hao, De Liao Chun-, Huang Shih-Wei
School of Medicine, College of Medicine, Taipei Medical University, Taipei; Department of Primary Care Medicine, Shuang Ho Hospital, Taipei Medical University, Taipei.
School of Medicine, College of Medicine, Taipei Medical University, Taipei; Department of Primary Care Medicine, Shin Kong Wu Ho-Su Memorial Hospital, Taipei.
Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2024 Apr;105(4):750-759. doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2024.01.003. Epub 2024 Jan 18.
To investigate the efficacy of corticosteroid (CS) injection methods for frozen shoulder.
PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library were searched up to May 6, 2023.
Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that investigated CS injection methods for frozen shoulder were included.
Data were extracted independently by 2 authors. Risk of bias was assessed using the RoB 2 tool.
A random-effects network meta-analysis was performed within a frequentist framework. The certainty of evidence was evaluated using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations approach. A total of 66 RCTs involving 4491 patients were included. For short-term outcomes, 4-site injection (vs placebo [PLA]: standardized mean difference [SMD]=-2.20, 95% confidence interval [CI], -2.81 to -1.59 in pain; SMD=2.02; 95% CI, 1.39-2.65 in global function) was the most effective (low certainty). Rotator interval injection was the optimal treatment with moderate to high certainty (vs PLA: SMD=-1.07, 95% CI, -1.51 to -0.64 in pain; SMD=0.94, 95% CI, 0.49-1.40 in global function). For midterm outcomes, 4-site injection was most effective (vs PLA: SMD=-1.71, 95% CI, -2.41 to -1.01 in pain; SMD=2.22, 95% CI, 1.34-3.09 in global function; low certainty). Distension via rotator interval (D-RI) was the optimal treatment with moderate to high certainty (vs PLA: SMD=-1.10, 95% CI, -1.69 to -0.51 in pain; SMD=1.46, 95% CI, 0.73-2.20 in global function). Distension and intra-articular injection via anterior or posterior approaches produced effects equivalent to those of rotator interval injection and D-RI.
Rotator interval injection, distension, and intra-articular injection had equivalent effects on symptom relief. More RCTs are required to validate the superiority of multisite injections.
探讨皮质类固醇(CS)注射方法治疗肩周炎的疗效。
检索截至2023年5月6日的PubMed、Embase和Cochrane图书馆。
纳入研究CS注射方法治疗肩周炎的随机对照试验(RCT)。
由2位作者独立提取数据。使用RoB 2工具评估偏倚风险。
在频率学派框架内进行随机效应网络荟萃分析。使用推荐分级、评估、制定和评价方法评估证据的确定性。共纳入66项涉及4491例患者的RCT。对于短期结局,四点注射(与安慰剂[PLA]相比:疼痛方面的标准化均数差[SMD]= -2.20,95%置信区间[CI],-2.81至-1.59;整体功能方面的SMD = 2.02;95% CI,1.39 - 2.65)是最有效的(低确定性)。肩胛下肌间隙注射是具有中等到高确定性的最佳治疗方法(与PLA相比:疼痛方面的SMD = -1.07,95% CI,-1.51至-0.64;整体功能方面的SMD = 0.94,95% CI,0.49 - 1.40)。对于中期结局,四点注射最有效(与PLA相比:疼痛方面的SMD = -1.71,95% CI,-2.41至-1.01;整体功能方面的SMD = 2.22,95% CI,1.34 - 3.09;低确定性)。通过肩胛下肌间隙扩张(D-RI)是具有中等到高确定性的最佳治疗方法(与PLA相比:疼痛方面的SMD = -1.10,95% CI,-1.69至-0.51;整体功能方面的SMD = 1.46,95% CI,0.73 - 2.20)。通过前或后入路进行的扩张和关节内注射产生的效果与肩胛下肌间隙注射和D-RI相当。
肩胛下肌间隙注射、扩张和关节内注射在缓解症状方面效果相当。需要更多的RCT来验证多点注射的优越性。