Department of Anesthesiology, The Changzhou First People's Hospital, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University, Changzhou, Jiangsu, People's Republic of China.
Department of Orthopaedics, Changzhou Municipal Hospital of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Changzhou hospital affiliated to Nanjing University of Chinese Medicine, 25 North Heping Road, Changzhou, 213000, Jiangsu, China.
Sci Rep. 2024 Oct 16;14(1):24303. doi: 10.1038/s41598-024-74582-3.
Arthroscopic capsular release is a most well-known technique with favorable outcomes for frozen shoulder. However, considering the surgical trauma and the improvement of multisite injection, we design a study to compare the pain relief and safety of multisite injection (MI) versus arthroscopic capsular release (ACR) for frozen shoulder. A total of 80 patients with unilater al frozen shoulder were enrolled in this study. Group RBT (n = 40) received multisite injection (0.5% lidocaine and triamcinolone acetonide, once a week, no more than 2 injections), while Group ACR received arthroscopic capsular release. The following parameters were employed to compare: visual analog scale (VAS), range of motion (ROM), the Disability of Arm, Hand, and Shoulder (DASH) score and Oxford shoulder score (OSS). Side effects were also recorded. The VAS, ROM, DASH and OSS all improved significantly (P < 0.001). Internal rotation and external rotation at 1 month after operation were better in ACR group (40.35 ± 4.79 Vs 36.58 ± 7.49, 40.55 ± 4.37 Vs 38.63 ± 4.01, P = 0.009,0.043). However, no significance in terms of functional results and ROM was found at 6 months after operation. The OSS, DASH and VAS in patients with diabetes were 44.25 ± 3.05, 2.29 ± 1.12 and 0.50 ± 0.72, compared with 43.89 ± 3.09, 2.34 ± 1.49 and 0.29 ± 0.56 in patients without diabetes (P = 0.636, 0.889, 0.157). Multisite injection and arthroscopic capsular release are both effective treatments in the treatment of frozen shoulder. However, multisite injection is a simple, cost effective and superior alternative.
关节镜下囊松解术是治疗冻结肩的一种常用技术,疗效确切。然而,考虑到手术创伤和多点注射的改进,我们设计了一项研究来比较多点注射(MI)与关节镜下囊松解术(ACR)治疗冻结肩的疗效和安全性。本研究共纳入 80 例单侧冻结肩患者,RBT 组(n=40)接受多点注射(0.5%利多卡因和曲安奈德,每周一次,不超过 2 次),ACR 组接受关节镜下囊松解术。采用视觉模拟评分(VAS)、关节活动度(ROM)、手臂、手部和肩部残疾(DASH)评分和牛津肩评分(OSS)比较两组疗效。记录不良反应。VAS、ROM、DASH 和 OSS 均明显改善(P<0.001)。术后 1 个月时,ACR 组的内旋和外旋改善更好(40.35±4.79 vs 36.58±7.49,40.55±4.37 vs 38.63±4.01,P=0.009,0.043)。然而,术后 6 个月时,两组在功能结果和 ROM 方面无显著差异。糖尿病患者的 OSS、DASH 和 VAS 分别为 44.25±3.05、2.29±1.12 和 0.50±0.72,而无糖尿病患者分别为 43.89±3.09、2.34±1.49 和 0.29±0.56(P=0.636,0.889,0.157)。多点注射和关节镜下囊松解术都是治疗冻结肩的有效方法。然而,多点注射操作简单、经济有效、效果更优。