Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40802423›Full record

Trial reportSao Paulo medical journal = Revista paulista de medicina2025

Toward an algorithm of percutaneous microelectrolysis: a randomized clinical trial on invasive techniques.

Carlos Eduardo Girasol, Nathaly Escobar Durán, Santiago Marcelo D'Almeida, Oscar Ariel Ronzio

Registry-linked trialAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Sao Paulo medical journal = Revista paulista de medicina, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05478928 (Effects of Invasive Techniques in Myofascial Trigger Points), which is not on this map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

NCT05478928 naunknown statusnot on this map

Effects of Invasive Techniques in Myofascial Trigger Points: A Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial

TypeinterventionalSponsorMaimonides UniversityRan2022 to 2023Enrolled60ConditionsTrigger Point Pain, MyofascialArmsDynamic dry needling, Fixed dose dynamic MEP, Static Dry needling, Fixed dose static MEP, Algorithm-based dose static MEP
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Carlos Eduardo GirasolPostdoctoral Researcher, and Clinical Physiotherapist, Faculdade de Filosofia, Ciências e Letras, Universidade de São Paulo (USP), Ribeirão Preto (SP), Brazil.ORCID 0000-0002-3901-582X
Nathaly Escobar DuránResearcher, and Clinical Physiotherapist, Cuauhtémoc Plantel Aguascalientes University, Mérida, Mexico.ORCID 0000-0002-9965-0059
Santiago Marcelo D'AlmeidaProfessor, Researcher, and Clinical Physiotherapist, Maimónides University (UMai), Buenos Aires, Argentina.ORCID 0000-0003-1854-1756
Oscar Ariel RonzioProfessor, Researcher, and Clinical Physiotherapist, Arturo Jauretche Nacional University (UNAJ), Florencio Varela, Argentina.ORCID 0000-0002-0004-5992

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPercutaneous microelectrolysis (MEP) is a minimally invasive technique used for pain relief, inflammation control, and tissue repair. However, the optimal treatment protocol remains under debate.

objectiveTo compare the effects of dry needling and MEP, with and without a treatment algorithm, on pain in individuals with active myofascial trigger points (MTrPs) in the upper trapezius muscle. Design and setting: Randomized controlled trial conducted at Maimónides University, Buenos Aires.

methodsEighty-eight participants with MTrPs in the upper trapezius muscle were enrolled. The presence of MTrPs was confirmed through physical examination and algometric measurement before intervention. Participants were randomly assigned to one of six groups: Sham, dynamic dry needling, static dry needling, dynamic MEP, static MEP, or algorithmic MEP. Active treatments were administered using 0.30 mm × 40 mm acupuncture needles. Pain was assessed using two tools: the Numerical Pain Rating Scale (NPRS) and the Pressure Pain Threshold (PPT). Both measures were recorded with participants at rest before the intervention and again at 10 min, 24 h, 48 h, and 7 days post-intervention.

resultsSignificant post-intervention differences in NPRS scores were observed in all groups except dynamic dry needling when compared to Sham. The algorithmic MEP group achieved complete pain relief by day 7. In terms of PPT, the threshold values in the MEP groups were lower than those in the other groups.

conclusionsAll needling techniques demonstrated analgesic effects on myofascial trigger points, with the algorithm-enhanced MEP showing the most notable improvement in self-reported pain. However, MEP was not superior to other methods in improving pressure pain thresholds. CLINICAL TRIALS: NCT05478928.

Indexed as

AlgorithmsDry NeedlingMyofascial Pain SyndromesPain ManagementAdultFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPain MeasurementPain ThresholdSuperficial Back MusclesTime FactorsTreatment OutcomeTrigger PointsYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID40802423
PMCPMC12341435

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.