ReviewJournal of pain research2026
Time-Dependent Efficacy and Safety of Percutaneous Treatments for Lateral Epicondylitis: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis.
Review in Journal of pain research, 2026. 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: Recent reviews on lateral epicondylitis management frequently focus on single modalities or isolated outcomes. This study systematically evaluates the time-dependent efficacy and safety of eight percutaneous treatments (placebo, corticosteroids, platelet-rich plasma [PRP], autologous blood [AB], hyaluronic acid, botulinum toxin [BT], dextrose prolotherapy [DPT], and dry needling [DN]) for lateral epicondylitis. Patients and Methods: Four databases (PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, and Web of Science) were searched for randomized controlled trials. Outcomes (pain intensity, functional disability, grip strength) were evaluated across short- (<1 month), mid- (1-3 months), and long-term (>6 months) intervals. Data were synthesized via network meta-analysis using mean differences (MD) or standardized mean differences (SMD) and SUCRA probabilities. Results: Forty-one trials (N=3,285) were included. Corticosteroids showed substantial efficacy for short-term pain relief (MD -1.62, 95% CI -2.52 to -0.72) but were associated with a long-term rebound effect. DPT demonstrated notable advantages for mid-term pain reduction (MD -1.73, 95% CI -2.85 to -0.60) and functional recovery. BT was associated with a potential negative trend in mid-term grip strength compared to placebo, whereas AB showed better outcomes than BT in head-to-head comparisons. For long-term outcomes, regenerative approaches like PRP, along with DN and BT, appeared to provide sustained pain relief. Conclusion: The therapeutic efficacy of percutaneous treatments appears to be time-dependent. Corticosteroids may be considered for rapid short-term relief, while DPT shows potential advantages for mid-term recovery. For long-term management, PRP and DN may offer sustained analgesia, potentially avoiding the grip strength deficits occasionally associated with BT.
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.