|
Scientific Papers
You might need the PDF Reader to view these.
| |
|
|
![]() |
| 1. |
|
Abstract-Heel Pain Treatment Results using Extracorporeal Pulse Activation Therapy (EPAT) vs. Extracorporeal Shock Wave Therapy (ESWT).
by Angela Drury-Schimberg, D.P.M., F.A.C., F.A.S.
|
PDF |
| |
|
|
|
| 2. |
|
The American Journal of Sports Medicine - Eccentric Loading, Shock-Wave Treatment, or a Wait-and-See Policy for Tendinophathy of the Main Body of Tendo Achillis
Jan D. Rompe, M.D., Bernhard Nafe, M.D., John P. Furia, M.D. Ph.D., and Nicola Maffulli, M.D., Ph.D., F.R.C.S.(Orth)
|
PDF |
| |
|
|
|
| 3. |
|
The American Journal of Sports Medicine - High-Energy Extracorporeal Shock Wave Therapy as a Treatment for Insertional Achilles Tendinopathy
by John Patrick Furia, M.D.
|
PDF |
| |
|
|
|
| 4. |
|
The American Journal of Sports Medicine - Extracorporeal Shockwave for Chronic Patellar Tendinopathy
Ching-Jen Wang M.D., Jih-Yang Ko M.D., Yi-Sheng Chan M.D., Lin-Hsiu Weng M.D. and Shan-Lin Hsu M.D.
|
PDF |
| |
|
|
|
| 5. |
|
Physical Therapy - Effectiveness of Radial Shock-Wave
Therapy for Calcific Tendinitis of the Shoulder: Single-Blind, Randomized Clinical Study
|
PDF |
| |
|
|
|
| 6. |
|
Radial
Shockwave Therapy in Calcific Tendinitis of the Rotator
Cuff.pdf
Dr. P. Magosch, ATOS Clinic Heidelberg (Germany). |
PDF |
| |
|
|
|
| 7. |
|
Evaluation
of Low-Energy Extracorporeal Shock-Wave Application for
Treatment of Chronic Plantar Fasciitis
By Jan D. Rompe, MD, Carsten Schoellner,
MD, And Bernhard Nafe, MD |
PDF |
| |
|
|
|
| 8. |
|
The American Journal of Orthopedics - Safety
and Efficacy of ESWT for Chronic Lateral Epicondylitis.pdf
By John P. Furia, M.D. |
PDF |
| |
|
|
|
| 9. |
|
Foot and Ankle International - ESWT for
the Treatment of Plantar Fasciitis.pdf |
PDF |
| |
|
|
|
| 10. |
|
The American Journal of Sports Medicine - Shock Wave
Therapy for Patients with Lateral Epiconylitis of the Elbow
By Ching-Jen Wang, M.S. & Han-Shiang Chen, M.D. |
PDF |
| |
|
|
|
| 11. |
|
Radial
Extracorporeal Shock Wave Therapy (rESWT) in Chronic Plantar
Heel Pain - a RCT
L. Gerdesmeyer, L. Weil, B. Scrurran, J. Stienstra,
C. Frey, K. Fedder, M. Maier, M. Henne, M. Russlies, H. Lohrer,
J. Vester |
PDF |
| |
|
|
|
| 12. |
|
Der niedergelassene Chirurg - Radial
Shockwave Therapy in Heel Spur (Plantar Fasciitis) |
|
| |
|
|
|
| 13. |
|
Techniques in Foot and Ankle Surgery - Shock
Wave Therapy for Treatment of Foot and Ankle Conditions
Alastair Younger, MB, ChB, FRCSC
|
PDF |
| |
|
|
|
| 14. |
|
Extracorporeal
shock wave therapy for the treatment of chronic calcifying
tendonitis of the rotator cuff: a randomized controlled
trial.
Gerdesmeyer L, Wagenpfeil S, Haake M, Maier M, Loew M, Wortler
K, Lampe R, Seil R, Handle G, Gassel S, Rompe JD.
Department of Orthopedic Surgery and Sportstraumatology,
Technical University Munich, Munich, Germany.
CONTEXT: Extracorporeal shock wave therapy (ESWT) has been
used to treat calcific tendonitis of the shoulder, but trials
of ESWT for this purpose have had methodological deficiencies
and thus there is limited evidence for its effectiveness.
OBJECTIVE: To determine whether fluoroscopy-guided ESWT
improves function, reduces pain, and diminishes the size
of calcific deposits in patients with chronic calcific tendonitis
of the shoulder. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Double-blind,
randomized, placebo-controlled trial conducted between February
1997 and March 2001 among 144 patients (of 164 screened)
recruited from referring primary care physicians, orthopedic
surgeons, and sports physicians in 7 orthopedic departments
in Germany and Austria. INTERVENTIONS: Either high-energy
ESWT, low-energy ESWT, or placebo (sham treatment). The
2 ESWT groups received the same cumulative energy dose.
Patients in all 3 groups received 2 treatment sessions approximately
2 weeks apart, followed by physical therapy. MAIN OUTCOME
MEASURES: The primary end point was the change in the mean
Constant and Murley Scale (CMS) score from baseline to 6
months after the intervention. Secondary end points were
changes in the mean CMS scores at 3 and 12 months, as well
as changes in self-rated pain and radiographic change in
size of calcific deposits at 3, 6, and 12 months. RESULTS:
Of 144 patients enrolled, all completed treatment as randomized
and 134 completed the 6-month follow-up. Both high-energy
and low-energy ESWT resulted in significant improvement
in the 6-month mean (95% confidence interval [CI]) CMS score
compared with sham treatment (high-energy ESWT: 31.0 [26.7-35.3]
points; low-energy ESWT: 15.0 [10.2-19.8] points; sham treatment:
6.6 [1.4-11.8] points; P<.001 for both comparisons).
Patients who received high-energy ESWT also had significant
6-month CMS improvements compared with those who received
low-energy ESWT (P<.001). We found similar results for
both the 3-month and 12-month CMS comparisons, as well as
for self-rated pain and radiographic changes at 3, 6, and
12 months. CONCLUSIONS: Both high-energy and low-energy
ESWT appeared to provide a beneficial effect on shoulder
function, as well as on self-rated pain and diminished size
of calcifications, compared with placebo. Furthermore, high-energy
ESWT appeared to be superior to low-energy ESWT. |
*Fee
to see whole paper |
| |
|
|
|
| 15. |
|
Antibacterial
effects of extracorporeal shock waves.*
Gerdesmeyer L, von Eiff C, Horn C, Henne M, Roessner M,
Diehl P, Gollwitzer H.
Klinik und Poliklinik fur Orthopadie und Sportorthopadie
der Technischen Universitat Munchen, Munchen, Germany.
Despite considerable knowledge about effects of extracorporeal
shock-wave therapy (ESWT) on eukaryotic tissues, only little
data are available concerning their effect on prokaryotic
microorganisms. The objective of the present study was to
determine the bactericidal activity as a function of energy
flux density and shock-wave impulse number. Standardised
suspensions of Staphylococcus aureus ATCC 25923 were exposed
to different impulse numbers of shock waves with an energy
flux density (ED) up to 0.96 mJ mm(-2) (2 Hz). Subsequently,
viable bacteria were quantified by culture and compared
with an untreated control. After applying 4000 impulses,
a significant bactericidal effect was observed with a threshold
ED of 0.59 mJ mm(-2) (p < 0.05). A threshold impulse
number of more than 1000 impulses was necessary to reduce
bacterial growth (p < 0.05). Further elevation of energy
and impulse number exponentially increased bacterial killing.
ESWT proved to exert significant antibacterial effect in
an energy-dependent manner. Certain types of difficult-to-treat
infections could offer new applications for ESWT. |
|
| |
|
|
|
| 16. |
|
Repetitive
low-energy shock wave application without local anesthesia
is more efficient than repetitive low-energy shock wave application
with local anesthesia in the treatment of chronic plantar
fasciitis.*
Rompe JD, Meurer A, Nafe B, Hofmann A, Gerdesmeyer L.
BACKGROUND: It remains unclear whether application of local
anesthesia (LA) interferes with clinical efficacy of extracorporeal
shock wave therapy (ESWT) for chronic plantar fasciitis. Aims:
To evaluate the effect of local anesthesia on the clinical
outcome after repetitive low-energy ESWT for chronic plantar
fasciitis. METHODS: Eighty-six patients with chronic plantar
fasciitis were randomly assigned to receive either low-energy
ESWT without LA, given weekly for three weeks (Group I, n=45;
3 x 2000 pulses, total energy flux density per shock 0.09
mJ/mm2) or identical ESWT with LA (Group II, n=41). Primary
outcome measure was: Reduction of pain from baseline to month
3 post-treatment in a pain numeric rating scale [0-10 points]
during first steps in the morning, evaluated by an independent
blinded observer. Calculations were based on intention-to-treat.
RESULTS: No difference was found between the groups at baseline.
At 3 months, the average pain score was 2.2+/-2.0 points for
patients of Group I, and 4.1+/-1.5 points for patients of
Group II. The mean between-group difference was 1.9 points
(95% CI: [1.1-2.7 points]; P<.001). Significantly more
patients of Group I achieved 50% reduction of pain compared
to Group II (67% vs 29%, P<.001). CONCLUSION: ESWT as applied
should be done without LA in patients suffering from chronic
heel pain. LA applied prior treatment reduced the efficiency
of low-energy ESWT. |
*Fee
to see whole paper |
| |
|
|
|
| 17. |
|
Extracorporeal Shock Wave Therapy without Local
Anesthesia for Chronic Lateral Epicondylitis
Frank A. Pettrone, MD1 and Brian R. McCall, MD2
Investigation performed at the Virginia Hospital Center, Arlington,
Virginia, and the Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Georgetown
University Hospital, Washington, DC
Background: The use of extracorporeal shock wave therapy for
the treatment of lateral epicondylitis is controversial. The
purpose of this study was to evaluate the use of extracorporeal
shock wave therapy without local anesthesia to treat chronic
lateral epicondylitis.
Methods: One hundred and fourteen patients with a minimum
six-month history of lateral epicondylitis that was unresponsive
to conventional therapy were randomized into double-blind
active treatment and placebo groups. The protocol consisted
of three weekly treatments of either low-dose shock wave therapy
without anesthetic or a sham treatment. Patients had a physical
examination, including provocation testing and dynamometry,
at one, four, eight, and twelve weeks and at six and twelve
months after treatment. Radiographs, laboratory studies, and
electrocardiograms were also evaluated prior to participation
and at twelve weeks. A visual analog scale was used to evaluate
pain, and an upper extremity functional scale was used to
assess function. Crossover to active treatment was initiated
for nonresponsive patients who had received the placebo and
met the inclusion criteria after twelve weeks.
Results: A total of 108 of the 114 randomized patients completed
all treatments and the twelve weeks of follow-up required
by the protocol. Sixty-one patients completed one year of
follow-up, whereas thirty-four patients crossed over to receive
active treatment. A significant difference (p = 0.001) in
pain reduction was observed at twelve weeks in the intent-to-treat
cohort, with an improvement in the pain score of at least
50% seen in 61% (thirty-four) of the fifty-six patients in
the active treatment group who were treated according to protocol
compared with 29% (seventeen) of the fifty-eight subjects
in the placebo group. This improvement persisted in those
followed to one year. Functional activity scores, activity-specific
evaluation, and the overall impression of the disease state
all showed significant improvement as well (p < 0.05).
Crossover patients also showed significant improvement after
twelve weeks of active treatment, with 56% (nineteen of thirty-four)
achieving an improvement in the pain score of at least 50%
(p < 0.0001).
Conclusions: These results demonstrate that low-dose shock
wave therapy without anesthetic is a safe and effective treatment
for chronic lateral epicondylitis. |
|
| |
|
|
|
|