scholarly journals Ultrasound-Guided Dextrose Solution Perimysium Dissection for Posterior Shoulder Myofascial Pain

2021 ◽  
Vol Publish Ahead of Print ◽  
Author(s):  
Yi-Chen Lai ◽  
Sheng-Han Tsai ◽  
Hong-Jen Chiou
2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hideaki Hasuo ◽  
Hideya Oomori ◽  
Kohei Yoshida ◽  
Mikihiko Fukunaga

Abstract Background: Expectations for treatment have a favorable effect on the subsequent course of pain and behavior in patients. It is not known whether receiving interfascial injection while patients view their ultrasound image with doctors (visual feedback) is associated with positive treatment expectations. Methods: This was a prospective, multicenter, observational clinical trial. We evaluated whether visual feedback during ultrasound-guided interfascial injection affects treatment expectations and the subsequent course of pain in patients with myofascial pain syndrome. Treatment expectations were set as mediators of pain using path analysis. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients who showed improvement in pain numerical rating scale score by 50% or more 14 days after initiation of treatment. Results: During 2019 and 2020, 136 outpatients received ultrasound-guided interfascial injection for myofascial pain syndrome. Of these, 65 (47.8%) patients received visual feedback during ultrasound-guided interfascial injection. Compared with the non-visual feedback group, the visual feedback group had higher expectations for treatment, immediately after interfascial injection, and their expectations were maintained at day 14 of treatment (p < .001). In the visual feedback group, 67.7% of patients showed improvement in pain numerical rating scale score by 50% or more at day 14 (95% confidence interval: 56.5–78.9), whereas such improvement was observed in only 36.6% of the non-visual feedback group (95% confidence interval: 25.3–47.9; p < .001). Path analysis revealed that visual feedback had the largest influence on pain numerical rating scale reduction at 14 days, which was indirectly via higher expectations for treatment (β = 0.434).Conclusions: Visual feedback during ultrasound-guided interfascial injection had a positive effect on the subsequent course of pain in patients with myofascial pain syndrome by increasing patients’ treatment expectations.Trial registration: UMIN000043160. Registered 28 January 2021 (registered retrospectively).


2020 ◽  
Vol 2020 ◽  
pp. 1-9
Author(s):  
Xiang-Hong Lu ◽  
Xiao-Lan Chang ◽  
Si-Lan Liu ◽  
Jing-Ya Xu ◽  
Xiao-Jun Gou

Objective. To evaluate ultrasound-guided inactivation of myofascial trigger points (MTrPs) combined with abdominal muscle fascia stripping by liquid knife in the treatment of postherpetic neuralgia (PHN) complicated with abdominal myofascial pain syndrome (AMPS). Methods. From January 2015 to July 2018, non-head-and-neck PHN patients in the Pain Department, The First Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University, were treated with routine oral drugs and weekly paraspinal nerve block for two weeks. Patients with 2 < VAS (visual analogue scale) score < 6 were subjects of the study. They were assigned into control group 1 (C1, n = 33) including those with PHN and without myofascial pain syndrome (MPS) and control group 2 (C2, n = 33) including those with PHN complicated with MPS and observation group 1 (PL, n = 33) including those with PHN complicated with limb myofascial pain syndrome (LMPS) and observation group 2 (PA, n = 33) including those with PHN complicated with AMPS. All groups received zero-grade treatment: routine oral drugs and weekly paraspinal nerve block. PL and PA groups were also treated step by step once a week: primary ultrasound-guided inactivation of MTrPs with dry needling, secondary ultrasound-guided inactivation of MTrPs with dry and wet needling, and tertiary ultrasound-guided dry and wet needling combined with muscle fascia stripping by liquid knife. At one week after primary treatment, patients with a VAS score > 2 proceeded to secondary treatment. If the VAS score was <2, the treatment was maintained, and so on, until the end of the four treatment cycles. Pain assessment was performed by specialized nurses at one week after each treatment, including VAS score, McGill pain questionnaire (MPQ) score, pressure pain sensory threshold (PPST), and pressure pain tolerance threshold (PPTT). VAS score was used as the main index and VAS <2 indicated effective treatment. At 3 months after treatment, outpatient and/or telephone follow-up was performed. The recurrence rate was observed and VAS > 2 was regarded as recurrence. Results. At one week after primary treatment, the effective rate was 66.7% in PL group, significantly higher than that in PA group (15.2%, P<0.05). At one week after secondary treatment, the effective rate was 100% and 37.5% in PL and PA groups, respectively, with significant difference between the groups (P<0.05). The effective rate increased to 90.6% in PA group at one week after tertiary treatment. At one week after the end of treatment cycles, the scores of VAS and MPQ were significantly lower in C1, PL, and PA groups than in C2 group (P<0.05), while PPST and PPTT were significantly higher than in C2 group (P<0.05). There was no significant difference between C1 group and PL group (P>0.05). At follow-up at 3 months after treatment, the recurrence rate was low in each group, with no significant difference between the groups (P>0.05). Conclusion. About 57% of PHN patients with mild to moderate pain are complicated with MPS, and ultrasound-guided inactivation of MTrPs with dry and wet needling can effectively treat PHN patients complicated with LMPS. However, patients with PHN complicated with AMPS need to be treated with ultrasound-guided MTrPs inactivation combined with muscle fascia stripping by liquid knife as soon as possible.


2012 ◽  
Vol 16 (3) ◽  
pp. 405-406
Author(s):  
Tomás Domingo-Rufes ◽  
Maribel Miguel-Pérez ◽  
Victor Mayoral ◽  
Juan Blasi ◽  
Antonio Sabaté

2008 ◽  
Vol 6;11 (12;6) ◽  
pp. 885-889 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kenneth P. Botwin

Background: Myofascial pain is defined as pain that originates from myofascial trigger points in skeletal muscle. It is prevalent in regional musculoskeletal pain syndromes, either alone or in combination with other pain generators. The myofascial pain syndrome is one of the largest groups of under diagnosed and under treated medical problems encountered in clinical practice. Trigger points are commonly seen in patients with myofascial pain which is responsible for localized pain in the affected muscles as well as referred pain patterns. Correct needle placement in a myofascial trigger point is vital to prevent complications and improve efficacy of the trigger point injection to help reduce or relieve myofascial pain. In obese patients, these injections may not reach the target tissue. In the cervicothoracic spine, a misguided or misplaced injection can result in a pneumothorax. Here, we describe an ultrasound-guided trigger point injection technique to avoid this potential pitfall. Office based ultrasound-guided injection techniques for musculoskeletal disorders have been described in the literature with regard to tendon, bursa, cystic, and joint pathologies. For the interventionalist, utilizing ultrasound yields multiple advantages technically and practically, including observation of needle placement in real-time, ability to perform dynamic studies, the possibility of diagnosing musculoskeletal pathologies, avoidance of radiation exposure, reduced overall cost, and portability of equipment within the office setting. To our knowledge, the use of ultrasound guidance in performing trigger point injection in the cervicothoracic area, particularly in obese patients, has not been previously reported. Methods: A palpable trigger point in the cervicothoracic musculature was localized and marked by indenting the skin with the tip of a plastic needle cover. The skin was then sterile prepped. Then, using an ultrasound machine with sterile coupling gel and a sterile latex free transducer cover, the musculature in the cervicothoracic spine where the palpable trigger point was detected was visualized. Then utilizing direct live ultrasound guidance, a 25-gauge 1.5 inch needle connected to a 3 mL syringe was placed into the muscle at the exact location of the presumed trigger point. This guidance helps confirm needle placement in muscle tissue and not in an adipose tissue or any other non-musculature structure. Results: The technique is simple to be performed by a pain management specialist who has ultrasound system training. Conclusion: Ultrasound-guided trigger point injections may help confirm proper needle placement within the cervicothoracic musculature. The use of ultrasound-guided trigger point injections in the cervicothoracic musculature may also reduce the potential for a pneumothorax by an improperly placed injection. Key words: Trigger point injection, myofascial pain, ultrasound


2020 ◽  
Vol 73 (6) ◽  
pp. 564-565 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mürsel Ekinci ◽  
Bahadir Ciftci ◽  
Haci Ahmet Alici ◽  
Ali Ahiskalioglu

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document