AIMTo systematically search literature and determine a preferable surgical procedure in patients with failed conservative treatment of calcifying tendinitis of the shoulder.METHODSThe electronic online databases MEDLINE (through PubMed), EMBASE (through OVID), CINAHL (through EB- SCO), Web of Science and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were systematically searched in May 2016. Eligible for inclusion were all available studies with level II and level III evidence (LoE). Data was assessed and extracted by two independent review authors using a specifically for this study designed data extraction form.RESULTSSix studies (294 surgically treated shoulders) were included in this review. No significant differences between the three available treatment options (acromioplasty with the removal of the calcific deposits, acromioplasty or solely the removal of the calcific deposits) were detected regarding the functional and clinical outcome. The follow-up ranged from 12 mo to 5 years. Complication rates were low. No reoperations were necessary and the only reported complication was adhesive capsulitis, which in all cases could be treated conservatively with full recovery.CONCLUSIONWe found that all three available treatment options show good functional and clinical outcomes in the short and midterm. However, a favorable procedure is difficult to determine due to the lack of high-quality comparing studies.
Background:The surgical procedure for calcific tendinitis of the shoulder remains a matter of dispute. Some advocate complete removal of the calcium deposits. The aim of this study was to investigate the midterm clinical outcome of an isolated acromioplasty with a secondary aim to investigate the relationship between the persisting presence of the calcifications and the midterm clinical outcome.
Background
A preferable surgical treatment for patients with conservative therapy-resistant calcifying tendinitis of the shoulder is still a matter of debate. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to evaluate and compare short-term clinical and radiological results of three surgical treatment options for these patients.
Methods
A multicenter randomized trial was conducted. Sixty-nine patients were randomly assigned to receive 1. subacromial decompression (Group SAD), 2. debridement of calcifications (Group D), or 3. debridement of calcifications with SAD (Group D + SAD). Stringent inclusion and exclusion criteria were used. The primary outcome was an improvement in VAS for pain (pVAS) 6 months postoperatively. Secondary outcomes were an improvement in pVAS 6 weeks postoperatively, functional outcomes (CMS, DASH, ASES), radiological outcome, additional treatments, and complications.
Results
The improvement in pVAS was significant in all groups (p < 0.001) and did not differ between the groups after 6 months. Six weeks postoperatively, the improvement in pVAS was significantly (p = 0.03) less in Group SAD compared to Group D + SAD (16.5 mm, SD 19.3 mm vs 33.1 mm, SD 19.7 mm, respectively). The mean size of calcifications decreased significantly in all groups (p < 0.0001). In Group SAD, the size of the calcifications decreased less (p = 0.04) compared to Group D and Group D + SAD after 6 weeks. Group SAD received more additional treatments (p = 0.003) compared to Group D + SAD (9 vs 1), which were mainly subacromial cortisone injections.
Conclusions
All patient groups showed significant pain relief and an improvement in shoulder function 6 months after surgery. However, patients in Group SAD showed inferior pain relief and less improvement in DASH score after 6 weeks. Furthermore, this group required more postoperative additional treatments. No significant differences in clinical and radiological outcomes were observed between patients in Group D compared to Group D + SAD. Therefore, an arthroscopic debridement without subacromial decompression seems to be advisable for patients with therapy-resistant calcifying tendinitis of the shoulder.
Level of evidence 2, Open-Label Randomized Clinical Trial.
IRB METC Zuyderland MC. Number: 14-T-112.
Registered at trialregister.nl NL 4947.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.