Arthroscopic Capsular Release Provides Greater Range-of-Motion Improvement Within the First 6 Months Postoperatively Than Nonoperative Management Modalities in Frozen Shoulder: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.
{"title":"Arthroscopic Capsular Release Provides Greater Range-of-Motion Improvement Within the First 6 Months Postoperatively Than Nonoperative Management Modalities in Frozen Shoulder: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.","authors":"Zilin Sun, Renyi Liu","doi":"10.1002/arj.70519","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To evaluate the comparative efficacy and safety of arthroscopic capsular release (ACR) compared with nonoperative management modality for frozen shoulder.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A systematic search of PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, and Wanfang databases was conducted to identify randomized controlled trials comparing ACR with nonoperative management modalities for frozen shoulder. Two reviewers independently performed study selection, data extraction, and quality assessment. Outcomes included shoulder pain assessed using the visual analog scale, shoulder function, range of motion, and complications.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The analysis included 6 randomized controlled trials encompassing 705 patients. Evidence of very low to moderate certainty indicated that, within the first 6 months postoperatively, although the improvement in shoulder range of motion with ACR reached the minimal clinically important difference, the magnitude of this improvement diminished over time. Regarding pain, a statistically significant but not clinically meaningful improvement was observed at 6 months postoperatively; no significant improvement was found during other follow-up periods. Safety profiles were comparable between both treatment approaches.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The evidence suggests that ACR may offer superior improvements in shoulder range of motion within the first 6 months postoperatively compared with nonoperative management, but the evidence quality is very low to moderate, primarily because of significant heterogeneity and methodological limitations.</p><p><strong>Level of evidence: </strong>Level I, systematic review of Level I studies.</p>","PeriodicalId":55459,"journal":{"name":"Arthroscopy-The Journal of Arthroscopic and Related Surgery","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":6.9000,"publicationDate":"2026-10-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Arthroscopy-The Journal of Arthroscopic and Related Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/arj.70519","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Purpose: To evaluate the comparative efficacy and safety of arthroscopic capsular release (ACR) compared with nonoperative management modality for frozen shoulder.
Methods: A systematic search of PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, and Wanfang databases was conducted to identify randomized controlled trials comparing ACR with nonoperative management modalities for frozen shoulder. Two reviewers independently performed study selection, data extraction, and quality assessment. Outcomes included shoulder pain assessed using the visual analog scale, shoulder function, range of motion, and complications.
Results: The analysis included 6 randomized controlled trials encompassing 705 patients. Evidence of very low to moderate certainty indicated that, within the first 6 months postoperatively, although the improvement in shoulder range of motion with ACR reached the minimal clinically important difference, the magnitude of this improvement diminished over time. Regarding pain, a statistically significant but not clinically meaningful improvement was observed at 6 months postoperatively; no significant improvement was found during other follow-up periods. Safety profiles were comparable between both treatment approaches.
Conclusions: The evidence suggests that ACR may offer superior improvements in shoulder range of motion within the first 6 months postoperatively compared with nonoperative management, but the evidence quality is very low to moderate, primarily because of significant heterogeneity and methodological limitations.
Level of evidence: Level I, systematic review of Level I studies.
目的:评价关节镜下关节囊松解术(ACR)与非手术治疗肩周炎的疗效和安全性。方法:系统检索PubMed、Embase、Cochrane图书馆、Web of Science、中国国家知识基础设施和万方数据库,确定比较ACR与非手术治疗肩周炎的随机对照试验。两名审稿人独立进行研究选择、数据提取和质量评估。结果包括使用视觉模拟量表、肩关节功能、活动范围和并发症评估肩关节疼痛。结果:分析纳入6项随机对照试验,共705例患者。极低至中等确定性的证据表明,在术后的前6个月内,尽管ACR对肩关节活动度的改善达到了最小的临床重要差异,但这种改善的幅度随着时间的推移而减弱。在疼痛方面,术后6个月观察到有统计学意义但无临床意义的改善;在其他随访期间未发现明显改善。两种治疗方法的安全性比较。结论:有证据表明,与非手术治疗相比,ACR可能在术后前6个月内提供更好的肩关节活动度改善,但证据质量非常低至中等,主要是因为显著的异质性和方法学局限性。证据等级:一级,对一级研究的系统评价。
期刊介绍:
Nowhere is minimally invasive surgery explained better than in Arthroscopy, the leading peer-reviewed journal in the field. Every issue enables you to put into perspective the usefulness of the various emerging arthroscopic techniques. The advantages and disadvantages of these methods -- along with their applications in various situations -- are discussed in relation to their efficiency, efficacy and cost benefit. As a special incentive, paid subscribers also receive access to the journal expanded website.