Title |
Extracorporeal shock wave therapy in the treatment of primary bone marrow edema syndrome of the knee: a prospective randomised controlled study
|
---|---|
Published in |
BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders, December 2015
|
DOI | 10.1186/s12891-015-0837-2 |
Pubmed ID | |
Authors |
Fuqiang Gao, Wei Sun, Zirong Li, Wanshou Guo, Weiguo Wang, Liming Cheng, Debo Yue, Nianfei Zhang, Amanda Savarin |
Abstract |
The aim of this prospective study was to evaluate the effectiveness of extracorporeal shock wave therapy (ESWT) in normalizing the symptoms and imaging features of primary bone marrow edema syndrome (BMES) of the knee. This study compared the outcomes of ESWT (Group A) (n = 20) and intravenously applied prostacyclin and bisphosphonate (Group B) (n = 20) in the treatment of BMES of the knee in our department between 2011 and 2013. The Visual Analog Scale for pain (VAS, 100 mm), the Western Ontario and McMaster University Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC), the SF-36 scores and MRI scans as well as plain radiographs were obtained before and after therapy between two groups. Compared with Group B, we found greater improvement in VAS, the WOMAC Osteoarthritis Index and SF-36 score at 1, 3 and 6 months post-treatment in Group A (P < 0.05). Furthermore, MRI scans showed a higher incidence of distinct reduction and complete regression of bone marrow edema at 6 months in Group A (95 vs. 65 %; P = 0.018). The MRI at 1 year follow-up showed complete regression in all patients in Group A. However, two cases in Group B continued to normalize over the subsequent follow-up period. ESWT can produce rapid pain relief and functional improvement. It may be an effective, reliable, and non-invasive technique for rapid treatment of BMES of the knee. Research Registry UIN 528 , September 03, 2015. |
Twitter Demographics
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
United Kingdom | 3 | 38% |
United States | 2 | 25% |
Canada | 1 | 13% |
Unknown | 2 | 25% |
Demographic breakdown
Type | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Members of the public | 6 | 75% |
Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 13% |
Scientists | 1 | 13% |
Mendeley readers
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
United Kingdom | 1 | 1% |
Unknown | 88 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Student > Master | 15 | 17% |
Student > Ph. D. Student | 9 | 10% |
Researcher | 8 | 9% |
Other | 7 | 8% |
Student > Bachelor | 6 | 7% |
Other | 17 | 19% |
Unknown | 27 | 30% |
Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Medicine and Dentistry | 32 | 36% |
Nursing and Health Professions | 7 | 8% |
Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 4 | 4% |
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine | 3 | 3% |
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 3 | 3% |
Other | 9 | 10% |
Unknown | 31 | 35% |