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

Benefits of US-guided percutaneous lavage vs. ESWT for rotator cuff calcific tendinopathy

Download
Share
Reprints
Cite This
About
+ Favorites
Share
Reprints
Cite This
About
+ Favorites
Ace Report Cover
June 2016

Benefits of US-guided percutaneous lavage vs. ESWT for rotator cuff calcific tendinopathy

Vol: 5| Issue: 6| Number:52| ISSN#: 2564-2537
Study Type:Therapy
OE Level Evidence:2
Journal Level of Evidence:N/A

Extracorporeal shockwaves versus ultrasound-guided percutaneous lavage for the treatment of rotator cuff calcific tendinopathy: a randomized controlled trial

Eur J Phys Rehabil Med. 2016 Apr;52(2):145-51

Contributing Authors:
F Del Castillo-González JJ Ramos-Alvarez G Rodríguez-Fabián J González-Pérez E Jiménez-Herranz E Varela

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

Synopsis

243 patients with rotator cuff calcific tendonopathy (RCCT) were randomized to either extracorporeal shockwave treatment (ESWT) or ultrasound-guided percutaneous lavage (UGPL). The purpose of this study was to compare the effectiveness of the two aforementioned treatments with regards to shoulder pain, when measured up to 12 months. Findings indicated significant reduction of calcification and sho...

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