ReviewSouth African journal of sports medicine2026
Ultrasound-guided percutaneous needle electrolysis for musculoskeletal injuries: A scoping review considering implications for athletic populations.
Review in South African journal of sports medicine, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Ultrasound-guided percutaneous needle electrolysis (PNE) is an emerging minimally invasive technique used for musculoskeletal (MSK) injury management. Despite its growing use in clinical practice, the literature reports mixed findings regarding efficacy, safety, and optimal application in athletic populations. Objectives: This scoping review examines the current literature on PNE for MSK injuries in athletes, evaluating its effectiveness in reducing pain, improving functional recovery, and enhancing return-to-play outcomes. The review also explores its safety profile and comparative advantages over conventional rehabilitation strategies. Methods: A systematic search was conducted in PubMed, Scopus, ScienceDirect, Google Scholar, and Web of Science. Peer-reviewed articles published between 2010 and 2024 were selected based on relevance to PNE, MSK injury management, and athlete populations. Studies were analysed for intervention protocols, outcome measures, and follow-up durations. Eligible articles included randomised controlled trials, cohort studies, pilot studies, systematic reviews, and meta-analyses. Data were charted for study design, population, intervention protocols, outcome measures, and follow-up duration. Findings were synthesised descriptively in line with a scoping review approach. Results: Eighteen studies met the inclusion criteria, encompassing randomised controlled trials, cohort studies, pilot studies, systematic reviews, and meta-analyses. Findings indicate that PNE significantly reduces pain and enhances functional recovery, particularly when combined with eccentric exercise. The most commonly treated conditions include patellar tendinopathy, supraspinatus tendinopathy, and lateral epicondylitis. While adverse effects are generally mild (e.g., transient soreness, hematoma), variations in treatment protocols hinder standardisation. Conclusion: PNE demonstrates promise as an effective treatment for MSK injuries in athletes, particularly when integrated with rehabilitation programs. However, methodological heterogeneity and limited long-term data necessitate further research to establish standardised protocols and optimise treatment outcomes. Expanding the evidence base through high-quality trials will be essential for its broader implementation in sports medicine.
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.