scholarly journals COMPARATIVE EFFICACY OF COMBINED LOW-INTENSITY EXTRACORPOREAL SHOCKWAVE THERAPY AND ORAL THERAPY VS ORAL THERAPY ALONE FOR CHRONIC PELVIC PAIN SYNDROME: A META-ANALYSIS OF RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL

2021 ◽  
Vol 28 (2) ◽  
pp. 172-178
Author(s):  
Rocky Nurakbariansyah ◽  
Doddy M. Soebadi ◽  
Wahjoe Djatisoesanto ◽  
Johan Renaldo
Keyword(s):  
Oral Therapy ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Chronic Pelvic Pain Syndrome ◽  
Urinary Symptoms ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Pelvic Pain Syndrome ◽  
Extracorporeal Shockwave Therapy ◽  
Extracorporeal Shockwave ◽  
Shockwave Therapy ◽  
Low Intensity

Objective: This study aimed to compare the efficacy of Low-Intensity Extracorporeal Shockwave Therapy (Li-ESWT) and oral therapy combination compared to sole oral therapy for reducing symptoms in CP/CPPS patients. Material & Methods: A systematic search was conducted from the electronic database including PubMed, Clinicaltrial.gov, and Cochrane Library, published up to July 2020 following the PRISMA guideline. We screened RCTs with the inclusion criteria and assessed the quality with the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. The primary outcome was the National Institute of Health Chronic Prostatitis Symptom Index (NIH-CPSI) and subgroup analysis for triple therapy users was conducted to improve interpretability. The analysis was performed using Review Manager 5.3. Results: A total of 2 RCTs consisted of 91 CP/CPPS patients were analyzed. Pooled analysis showed that compared to the oral therapy only group, combination therapy had a significant lower NIH-CPSI total score at the endpoint of the treatment (MD -7.46, 95% CI -9.85 to -5.07, p<0.001) and NIH-CPSI component pain score (MD -3.48, 95% CI -5.04 to -1.93, p<0.0001), urinary symptoms score (MD -0.96, 95% CI -1.47 to -0.45, p<0.001), and quality of life (QoL) impact score (MD -2.94; 95% CI -3.68 to -2.20, p=<0.001). Conclusion: This review revealed that patients undergoing combination Li-ESWT therapy have lower total NIH-CPSI scores than patients receiving oral therapy alone, this finding is consistent with each component of the score: pain, urinary symptoms, and impact on QoL.

scholarly journals The Efficacy and Safety of Extracorporeal Shockwave Therapy versus Acupuncture in the Management of Chronic Prostatitis/Chronic Pelvic Pain Syndrome: Evidence Based on a Network Meta-analysis

2021 ◽  
Vol 15 (6) ◽  
pp. 155798832110579
Author(s):  
Yongming Kang ◽  
Pan Song ◽  
Dehong Cao ◽  
Xiaoyu Di ◽  
Yanyong Lu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Chronic Prostatitis ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Chronic Pelvic Pain Syndrome ◽  
Pain Syndrome ◽  
Urinary Symptoms ◽  
Pelvic Pain Syndrome ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Extracorporeal Shockwave Therapy ◽  
Shockwave Therapy

The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of extracorporeal shockwave therapy (ESWT) and acupuncture therapy for patients with chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome (CP/CPPS). We searched electronic databases including PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase and web of science from its inception to June 1, 2021. The randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared ESWT and acupuncture in the management of CP/CPPS were identified. A network meta-analysis was conducted with the software of STATA 14.0. Nine RCTs with 525 patients were enrolled in our analysis. The results revealed that both ESWT and acupuncture were significantly better than the sham procedure in the outcomes of total score of NIH-CPSI, pain subscore, urinary symptoms subscore, QoL subscore, IPSS score, the IIEF score and response rates ( p < .05). Both ESWT and acupuncture were well-tolerated and had no obviously increased adverse events. Compared with acupuncture, ESWT was associated with better short term (<4w) and mid-term (8-12 w) efficacy of total score, pain subscore, urinary symptoms subscore, and QoL subscore of NIH-CPSI, IPSS score, IIEF score, and response rate. However, ESWT did not present better long-term (<24 w) outcomes than acupuncture in total score, pain subscore, urinary symptoms subscore, and QoL subscore of NIH-CPSI. Both ESWT and acupuncture were effective and well-tolerated in the management of CP/CPPS. ESWT seemed to have better short (<4 w) and mid-term (8-12 w) efficacy but similar long-term (>24 w) efficacy than acupuncture.

scholarly journals Comparison between prolozone therapy and extracorporeal shockwave therapy in management of pain and function in resistant cases of lateral epicondylitis: a randomised controlled trial

2020 ◽  
Vol 7 (8) ◽  
pp. 1216
Author(s):  
Margaret Chabungbam ◽  
Akoijam Joy Singh ◽  
Longjam Nilachandra Singh ◽  
Yumnam Ningthemba ◽  
Sreejith C. ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Randomised Controlled Trial ◽  
Tennis Elbow ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Lateral Epicondylitis ◽  
Painful Condition ◽  
Extracorporeal Shockwave Therapy ◽  
Extracorporeal Shockwave ◽  
Shockwave Therapy ◽  
Vas Score ◽  
Randomised Controlled

Background: Lateral epicondylitis also known as the tennis elbow is a painful condition of the elbow caused by overuse. The disease imparts significant disability to those affected in terms of the quantity and quality of work done.Methods: A randomised controlled trial was conducted in the Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, RIMS, Imphal for a period of 1 year from February 2017 to January 2018. Eighty-four patients with resistant lateral epicondylitis recruited were divided into 2 groups- group A received Prolozone injection while group B underwent Extracorporeal Shockwave Therapy (ESWT).Results: Assessments of VAS (Visual Analog Scale) and PRTEE (Patient Rated Tennis Elbow Evaluation) were done at 8 weeks and 24 weeks. The mean VAS score in Prolozone group improved from 7.22±0.89 to 4.04±1.01 at 8 weeks to 1.67±0.70 at end of 24 weeks. In ESWT group, mean VAS score improved to 3.91±0.72 at 8 weeks and reduced to 2.3±0.68 at end of 24 weeks. PRTEE improved significantly in both the groups, from 85.33±3.29 to 24.87±2.10 in Prolozone group, and from 85.17±2.83 to 41.89±3.17 in ESWT group.Conclusions: The improvement in pain and disability is better in prolozone group than ESWT (p<0.05) in chronic lateral epicondylitis.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document