ArticleLife (Basel, Switzerland)2026
Percutaneous Electrolysis for Patellar Tendinopathy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Article in Life (Basel, Switzerland), 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Patellar tendinopathy is a chronic musculoskeletal condition characterized by localized pain and functional impairment. This systematic review and exploratory meta-analysis aimed to synthesize current evidence on the effectiveness of percutaneous electrolysis (PE), combined with eccentric exercise, for improving functional performance in individuals with patellar tendinopathy. Following PRISMA guidelines and registration in PROSPERO (CRD420251233971), comprehensive searches were performed in Cochrane Library, PEDro, PubMed, ScienceDirect, Scopus, and Web of Science databases. Only two randomized controlled trials, published between 2016 and 2021, met the eligibility criteria and were included in the quantitative synthesis. Functional capacity recorded using the Victorian Institute of Sport Assessment-Patella (VISA-P) scale was the primary outcome. Both included studies presented some concerns regarding risk of bias. The pooled random-effects meta-analysis (REML estimation with Hartung-Knapp-Sidik-Jonkman adjustment) revealed no statistically significant difference favoring PE over control interventions (Hedges' g = -0.10; 95% CI: -2.69 to 2.50;
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.