ReviewJSES reviews, reports, and techniques2026
Image-guided versus landmark-guided suprascapular nerve block for shoulder pain in rotator cuff tears: a systematic review.
Review in JSES reviews, reports, and techniques, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Proteomic trajectories in human rotator cuff degeneration: a systematic review of immunohistochemical studies.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2026Pooled it
- Glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists and rotator cuff disease: a scoping review.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Suprascapular nerve block (SSNB) is a recognized treatment for chronic shoulder pain, including pain from rotator cuff tears. While it is purported that image-guided SSNB improve injection accuracy over landmark-guided techniques, the impact on clinical outcomes remains unclear. This systematic review compared image-guided vs. landmark-guided SSNB in patients with rotator cuff tears, evaluating efficacy, pain relief, functional improvement, complications, and duration of relief. Methods: We searched PubMed, MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, Embase, and CINAHL (inception to April 2025) for prospective or retrospective studies comparing image-guided (ultrasound, fluoroscopy, computed tomography, or arthroscopic) to landmark-guided SSNB. Two reviewers independently screened titles/abstracts and full texts, with discrepancies resolved by consensus. Data on pain outcomes, functional scores, complications, and duration of pain relief were extracted. Risk of bias was assessed for each study. Results: Thirty studies were included, comprising 25 randomized controlled trials, 2 nonrandomized prospective studies, and 3 retrospective studies, totaling 2,205 patients. Both image-guided and landmark-guided techniques significantly reduced pain and improved shoulder function, with pain reduction typically ranging from 3.2 to 5.5 points on a 0-10 visual analog scale at 48 hours postoperatively. There was no consistent evidence indicating superior clinical outcomes with image-guided techniques in terms of pain relief, functional improvement, complication rates, or duration of analgesia. Conclusion: Both image-guided and landmark-guided SSNB techniques provide effective pain relief and functional improvement in patients with rotator cuff-related shoulder pain. Despite potential procedural advantages of image guidance, such as reduced needle repositioning and higher first-attempt success rates, these benefits did not translate into consistently superior clinical outcomes. This systematic review suggests landmark-guided SSNB offer similar outcomes to image-guided techniques, with implications for resource and expertise availability.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.