ReviewOrthopadie (Heidelberg, Germany)2023
[Infiltration therapies for lateral epicondylopathy].
Review in Orthopadie (Heidelberg, Germany), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The therapy of the lateral epicondylopathy (tennis elbow) includes drug injection into the extensor tendon insertion in chronic cases. The choice of medication and the type of injection is decisive for the success of therapy. Furthermore, accurate application is indispensable for therapy success (e.g. peppering injection technique, ultrasound-supported injection technique). Corticosteroid injection is often associated with short-term success, so that other options have found their way into everyday practice. Objectification of treatment success is usually defined by Patient-Reported Outcome Measurements (PROM). With the introduction of Minimal Clinically Important Differences (MCID), statistically significant results are put into perspective in terms of clinical significance. Therapy for lateral epicondylopathy was considered effective if the mean difference in score results between baseline and follow-up exceeded 1.5 points for the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), 16 points for Disabilities of Arm, Shoulder and Hand Score (DASH), 11 points for Patient-Rated Tennis Elbow Evaluation (PRTEE), and 15 points for Mayo Elbow Performance Score (MEPS). However, the effectiveness must still be critically questioned according to meta-analytical evaluations, in which healing within 12 months was found in 90% of the cases of untreated chronic tennis elbow in the placebo groups. The use of substances, such as Traumeel (Biologische Heilmittel Heel GmbH, Baden-Baden, Germany), hyaluronic acid, botulinum toxin, platelet rich plasma (PRP), autologous blood or polidocanol, are based on various mechanisms. In particular, the use of PRP or autologous blood for the treatment of musculotendinous and degenerative articular pathologies has become popular, although the studies regarding effectiveness are inconsistent. PRP can be divided into leukocyte-rich (LR-PRP) and leukocyte-poor plasma (LP-PRP) according to its preparation. In contrast to LP-PRP, LR-PRP incorporates the middle and intermediate layers, but there is no standardized preparation described in the literature. Conclusive data regarding effective efficacy are still pending.
Indexed as
Identifiers
37074369What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.