超声引导下与透视引导下粘连性囊炎水肿扩张术的疗效比较:一项前瞻性研究。

IF 1.4 Q3 EMERGENCY MEDICINE
International Journal of Burns and Trauma Pub Date : 2024-08-25 eCollection Date: 2024-01-01 DOI:10.62347/YHQM4422
Mehtab Ahmad, Mohammad Jesan Khan, Mohd Hadi Aziz, Rida Fatima, Mohd Adnan, Adnan Anwer, Asad Khan, Shivank Khurana, Syed Mohd Shoaib, Faisal Harun
{"title":"超声引导下与透视引导下粘连性囊炎水肿扩张术的疗效比较:一项前瞻性研究。","authors":"Mehtab Ahmad, Mohammad Jesan Khan, Mohd Hadi Aziz, Rida Fatima, Mohd Adnan, Adnan Anwer, Asad Khan, Shivank Khurana, Syed Mohd Shoaib, Faisal Harun","doi":"10.62347/YHQM4422","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The incidence of adhesive capsulitis varies from 2-5% in the general population to 20% in people with diabetes. One of the most effective treatment methods is hydrodilatation, which can be done under US-guidance or Fluoroscopic guidance. However, the clinical effectiveness of US-guided injections in comparison to fluoroscopy-guided injections is still debatable. The possibility of severe side effects, the expense, and the time required to carry out this minimally invasive procedure highlight how crucial it is for patients to have a precise intra-articular injection. This study aims to compare the effectiveness of Ultrasound-guided vs. Fluoroscopic guided hydrodilatation for patients with adhesive capsulitis.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Sixty-four patients were randomly selected for hydrodilatation using any one of the techniques. The patients were evaluated for clinical improvements using the visual analog scale (VAS), oxford shoulder score (OSS), and range of motion (ROM).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The US-guided group experienced more pain reduction than the fluoroscopy group within the first four weeks (P < 0.001). The increase in ROM was much more significant in the US-guided group for the first 8 weeks. Improvement in Abduction and External rotation was much more significant (P < 0.001) in the first 4 weeks after hydrodilatation in the US-guided group. The improvement in ROM was maintained on long-term follow-up (mean 24 months), with 45 out of 64 (70.3%) reporting a normal or near normal ROM. On assessing the Oxford shoulder score improvements, the US-guided group's score significantly increased after the first week (P = 0.003), but the fluoroscopy-guided group's score increased after the second week. On comparison between the two groups, the amount of score improvement was more significant in the US-guided group than in the fluoroscopy-guided group in the first 4 weeks (P < 0.001).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>US-guided technique for intra-articular injection for patients with adhesive capsulitis provided a quicker pain reduction and a larger improvement in range of motion and overall shoulder functions.</p>","PeriodicalId":45488,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Burns and Trauma","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11411173/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparative outcome of ultrasound guided vs. fluoroscopy guided hydrodilatation in adhesive capsulitis: a prospective study.\",\"authors\":\"Mehtab Ahmad, Mohammad Jesan Khan, Mohd Hadi Aziz, Rida Fatima, Mohd Adnan, Adnan Anwer, Asad Khan, Shivank Khurana, Syed Mohd Shoaib, Faisal Harun\",\"doi\":\"10.62347/YHQM4422\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The incidence of adhesive capsulitis varies from 2-5% in the general population to 20% in people with diabetes. One of the most effective treatment methods is hydrodilatation, which can be done under US-guidance or Fluoroscopic guidance. However, the clinical effectiveness of US-guided injections in comparison to fluoroscopy-guided injections is still debatable. The possibility of severe side effects, the expense, and the time required to carry out this minimally invasive procedure highlight how crucial it is for patients to have a precise intra-articular injection. This study aims to compare the effectiveness of Ultrasound-guided vs. Fluoroscopic guided hydrodilatation for patients with adhesive capsulitis.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Sixty-four patients were randomly selected for hydrodilatation using any one of the techniques. The patients were evaluated for clinical improvements using the visual analog scale (VAS), oxford shoulder score (OSS), and range of motion (ROM).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The US-guided group experienced more pain reduction than the fluoroscopy group within the first four weeks (P < 0.001). The increase in ROM was much more significant in the US-guided group for the first 8 weeks. Improvement in Abduction and External rotation was much more significant (P < 0.001) in the first 4 weeks after hydrodilatation in the US-guided group. The improvement in ROM was maintained on long-term follow-up (mean 24 months), with 45 out of 64 (70.3%) reporting a normal or near normal ROM. On assessing the Oxford shoulder score improvements, the US-guided group's score significantly increased after the first week (P = 0.003), but the fluoroscopy-guided group's score increased after the second week. On comparison between the two groups, the amount of score improvement was more significant in the US-guided group than in the fluoroscopy-guided group in the first 4 weeks (P < 0.001).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>US-guided technique for intra-articular injection for patients with adhesive capsulitis provided a quicker pain reduction and a larger improvement in range of motion and overall shoulder functions.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":45488,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Burns and Trauma\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11411173/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Burns and Trauma\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.62347/YHQM4422\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"EMERGENCY MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Burns and Trauma","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.62347/YHQM4422","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"EMERGENCY MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:粘连性囊炎的发病率在普通人群中为 2-5%,在糖尿病患者中为 20%。最有效的治疗方法之一是水扩张术,可在 US 引导或透视引导下进行。然而,与透视引导下的注射相比,US 引导下的注射的临床效果仍有待商榷。进行这种微创手术可能会产生严重的副作用,而且费用高昂、耗时长,因此对患者来说,精确的关节内注射至关重要。本研究旨在比较超声波引导和透视引导下的水扩张术对粘连性囊炎患者的疗效:方法:随机选取 64 名患者,使用其中任何一种技术进行水扩张。采用视觉模拟量表(VAS)、牛津肩关节评分(OSS)和活动范围(ROM)对患者的临床改善情况进行评估:结果:在头四周内,US引导组比透视组的疼痛减轻幅度更大(P < 0.001)。在最初的 8 周内,US 引导组的 ROM 增加更为显著。在水力扩张术后的前四周,US引导组的外展和外旋改善更为显著(P < 0.001)。ROM的改善在长期随访(平均24个月)中得以保持,64人中有45人(70.3%)报告ROM正常或接近正常。在评估牛津肩关节评分改善情况时,US引导组的评分在第一周后显著提高(P = 0.003),但透视引导组的评分在第二周后有所提高。两组之间的比较显示,在前四周,美国引导组的得分提高幅度比透视引导组更明显(P < 0.001):结论:在 US 引导下对粘连性肩关节囊炎患者进行关节腔内注射能更快地减轻疼痛,更大程度地改善肩关节的活动范围和整体功能。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Comparative outcome of ultrasound guided vs. fluoroscopy guided hydrodilatation in adhesive capsulitis: a prospective study.

Background: The incidence of adhesive capsulitis varies from 2-5% in the general population to 20% in people with diabetes. One of the most effective treatment methods is hydrodilatation, which can be done under US-guidance or Fluoroscopic guidance. However, the clinical effectiveness of US-guided injections in comparison to fluoroscopy-guided injections is still debatable. The possibility of severe side effects, the expense, and the time required to carry out this minimally invasive procedure highlight how crucial it is for patients to have a precise intra-articular injection. This study aims to compare the effectiveness of Ultrasound-guided vs. Fluoroscopic guided hydrodilatation for patients with adhesive capsulitis.

Methods: Sixty-four patients were randomly selected for hydrodilatation using any one of the techniques. The patients were evaluated for clinical improvements using the visual analog scale (VAS), oxford shoulder score (OSS), and range of motion (ROM).

Results: The US-guided group experienced more pain reduction than the fluoroscopy group within the first four weeks (P < 0.001). The increase in ROM was much more significant in the US-guided group for the first 8 weeks. Improvement in Abduction and External rotation was much more significant (P < 0.001) in the first 4 weeks after hydrodilatation in the US-guided group. The improvement in ROM was maintained on long-term follow-up (mean 24 months), with 45 out of 64 (70.3%) reporting a normal or near normal ROM. On assessing the Oxford shoulder score improvements, the US-guided group's score significantly increased after the first week (P = 0.003), but the fluoroscopy-guided group's score increased after the second week. On comparison between the two groups, the amount of score improvement was more significant in the US-guided group than in the fluoroscopy-guided group in the first 4 weeks (P < 0.001).

Conclusion: US-guided technique for intra-articular injection for patients with adhesive capsulitis provided a quicker pain reduction and a larger improvement in range of motion and overall shoulder functions.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
12.50%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信