Tennis Elbow: A Combined Approach Using Acupuncture and Local Corticosteroid Injection

1997 ◽  
Vol 15 (2) ◽  
pp. 77-78 ◽  
Author(s):  
S A Chilton

In a controlled study, a group of 16 patients in a north of England general practice received acupuncture treatment for tennis elbow, followed by a small dose of corticosteroid with lignocaine to a residual tender spot at the elbow. These patients were compared with a similar group of 19 who received a larger dose to a tender spot at the lateral epicondyle, without any initial acupuncture treatment. In the acupuncture with steroid group: 13 patients had benefited following two treatment sessions, two after three sessions and one was no better at the end of the permitted three treatments. In the steroid alone group: 13 had had benefit after two sessions, three after three and three were unsuccessful. This suggests a trend towards increased and more rapid success in the acupuncture with steroid group, but the small number of patients precluded useful statistical analysis. The physical advantage in using acupuncture before administering local corticosteroid injection is that a lower dose of steroid can be used, with consequent reduction in the risk of tissue necrosis and inflammatory reaction.

2020 ◽  
Vol 79 (Suppl 1) ◽  
pp. 1615.2-1616
Author(s):  
A. R. Cunha ◽  
C. Mazeda ◽  
R. Aguiar ◽  
A. Barcelos

Background:Sacroiliitis is the hallmark of axial Spondyloarthritis (axSpA). ASAS-EULAR management recommendations for axSpA, consider glucocorticoid injections directed to the local site of musculoskeletal inflammation as a treatment option for pain relief, besides treatment with oral non-steroidal anti-inflammatory (NSAIDs) before starter biotechnological treatment. However, there are few studies to evaluate efficacy of this technique with a small number of patients and a short follow-up. Ultrasonography has been used as a valuable option to guide this technique.Objectives:To evaluate the efficacy and safety of ultrasound-guided injections of sacroiliac joints (SIJs) in patients with sacroiliitis using clinical and laboratory outcomes at baseline and at 4-6thweeks.Methods:This study involved patients with axSpA with acute sacroiliitis, ≥18 and ≤ 65 years old, with body mass index (BMI) < 30kg/m2attending the Rheumatology Outpatient Clinic, which had been poorly controlled (ASDAS>2.1) by conventional therapy (physiotherapy, NSAIDs at maximum tolerated dosing during ≥ 4 weeks). Sociodemographic, clinical (disease duration, BMI, BASDAI, BASFI, ASDAS) and laboratory (CRP) data was collected from the medical records at baseline and at 4-6thweeks.Statistical analyses were conducted using SPSS version 25. Continuous variables were described with mean/median ± standard deviation (SD).SIJs injection was performed, under ultrasound guidance, using standard procedures with 2mL of lidocaine 1% and 40mg of methylprednisolone, with a 22-gauge needle. The procedure was performed by the same operator. Written informed consents were obtained from all patients.Results:We performed eleven sacroiliac injection in eleven consecutive patients (one procedure per patient). Nine patients (81.8%) were female, mean age (±SD) of 40.6(±9.4) years, median disease duration(±SD) of 0.9(±6.2) years and median BMI(±SD) of 24.2(±3.3). Eight patients (72.7%) had Nr-axSpA. All patients were non-responders to NSAIDs.At 4-6thweeks there was a decreased in median (±SD) BASDAI (5.4±1.9 vs 4.1±1.9), BASFI (4.2±1.4 vs 3.5±2.3) and ASDAS (3.2±0.8 vs 2.2±0.6) indexes.Conclusion:As previous studies demonstrated, this technique seems to be safe and quite effective.Our goal is to increase the number of patients undergoing this technique and have a longer follow up to evaluate its efficacy. The study has several limitations: the mid- and long-term effects should be evaluated in the future based on the results of the short-term effects and the study was not conducted as a double-blinded, controlled study.References:[1]van der Heijde D, Burgos-Vargas R, Ramiro S.,et al. ASAS/EULAR recommendations for the management of ankylosing spondylitis. Ann Rheum Dis 2017; 76:978–991[2]Maugars Y, Mathis C, Vilon P, Prost A. Corticosteroid injection of the sacroiliac joint in patients with seronegative spondylarthropathy. Arthritis Rheum 1992; 35:564–8.[3]Pekkafahli MZ, Kiralp MZ, Basekim CC et al. Sacroiliac joint injections performed with sonographic guidance. J Ultrasound Med 2003;22:553–9[4]Klauser A, De Zordo T, Feuchtner G et al. Feasibility of ultrasound-guided sacroiliac joint injection considering sonoanatomic landmarks at two different levels in cadavers and patients. Arthritis Rheum 2008; 59:1618–1624.Disclosure of Interests:Ana Rita Cunha: None declared, Carolina Mazeda: None declared, Renata Aguiar: None declared, Anabela Barcelos Speakers bureau: Bene, Eli-Lilly, Pfizer, MSD, Novartis


2016 ◽  
Vol 03 (03) ◽  
pp. 12-16 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dr. M. A. Q. Ansari ◽  
Dr. Sachin A. Shah ◽  
Dr. S. R. Jidgekar

1996 ◽  
Vol 78-B (1) ◽  
pp. 128-132 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. A. N. Verhaar ◽  
G. H. I. M. Walenkamp ◽  
H. van Mameren ◽  
A. D. M. Kester ◽  
A. J. van der Linden

2019 ◽  
Vol 41 (2) ◽  
pp. 200-205
Author(s):  
Dingli Xu ◽  
Weiyu Jiang ◽  
Dichao Huang ◽  
Xudong Hu ◽  
Yang Wang ◽  
...  

Background: Extracorporeal shock wave therapy (ESWT) is a nonsurgical treatment for plantar fasciitis (PF) that has had satisfactory clinical outcomes. However, local corticosteroid injection (LCI) is often regarded as first-line treatment of PF, but there have been few studies comparing the 2 methods. Therefore, we compared the effect of ESWT and LCI on patients with PF. Methods: This was a block randomized controlled study comparing 49 patients treated with ESWT and 47 patients treated with LCI from January 2017 to December 2018 who were followed for 6 months. We evaluated the clinical outcomes in the 2 groups, including average pain, first-step pain, plantar fascia thickness, and Foot Function Index, Chinese version of the PF patients. Results: All patients had pain relief and function improvement after treatment, whereas the LCI group did not maintain significant clinical improvement at the 3-month follow-up. The patients in the ESWT group had a significantly better clinical outcome with better duration of improvement than the LCI group. Conclusion: For PF patients, both ESWT and LCI resulted in clinical improvement but EWST provided longer relief than LCI. Level of Evidence: Level II, prospective comparative study.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document