To unlock this feature and to subscribe to our weekly evidence emails, please create a FREE orthoEvidence account.

SIGNUP

Already Have an Account?

Loading...
Visit our Evidence-Based Covid-19 Website and Stay Up to Date with the latest Research.
Ace Report Cover

Calcific tendinitis of the rotator cuff: Barbotage + SAI more effective than SAI alone

Download
Share
Reprints
Cite This
About
+ Favorites
Share
Reprints
Cite This
About
+ Favorites
Author Verified
Ace Report Cover
October 2013

Calcific tendinitis of the rotator cuff: Barbotage + SAI more effective than SAI alone

Vol: 2| Issue: 9| Number:21| ISSN#: 2564-2537
Study Type:Therapy
OE Level Evidence:1
Journal Level of Evidence:N/A

Calcific tendinitis of the rotator cuff: a randomized controlled trial of ultrasound-guided needling and lavage versus subacromial corticosteroids

Am J Sports Med. 2013 Jul;41(7):1665-73. doi: 10.1177/0363546513487066. Epub 2013 May 21

Contributing Authors:
PB de Witte JW Selten A Navas J Nagels CP Visser RG Nelissen M Reijnierse

Did you know you're eligible to earn 0.5 CME credits for reading this report? Click Here

Synopsis

Forty-eight patients with calcific tendinitis of the rotator cuff (RCCT), for whom conservative treatment was unsuccessful, were randomized to receive either ultrasound-guided needling and lavage (barbotage), as well as a subacromial bursa corticosteroid injection (SAI) or SAI alone to compare the effects of these two treatment approaches. Results at 1 year indicated that, although both barbotage ...

CME Image

Did you know that you’re eligible to earn 0.5 CME credits for reading this report!

LEARN MORE

Join the Conversation

Please Login or Join to leave comments.

Learn about our AI Driven
High Impact Search Feature

High Impact Icon

Our AI driven High Impact metric calculates the impact an article will have by considering both the publishing journal and the content of the article itself. Built using the latest advances in natural language processing, OE High Impact predicts an article’s future number of citations better than impact factor alone.

Continue