Cargando…

Surgery for calcifying tendinitis of the shoulder: A systematic review

AIM: To systematically search literature and determine a preferable surgical procedure in patients with failed conservative treatment of calcifying tendinitis of the shoulder. METHODS: The electronic online databases MEDLINE (through PubMed), EMBASE (through OVID), CINAHL (through EB- SCO), Web of S...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Verstraelen, Freek U, Fievez, Eric, Janssen, Loes, Morrenhof, Wim
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Baishideng Publishing Group Inc 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5434349/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28567346
http://dx.doi.org/10.5312/wjo.v8.i5.424
Descripción
Sumario:AIM: To systematically search literature and determine a preferable surgical procedure in patients with failed conservative treatment of calcifying tendinitis of the shoulder. METHODS: The electronic online databases MEDLINE (through PubMed), EMBASE (through OVID), CINAHL (through EB- SCO), Web of Science and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were systematically searched in May 2016. Eligible for inclusion were all available studies with level II and level III evidence (LoE). Data was assessed and extracted by two independent review authors using a specifically for this study designed data extraction form. RESULTS: Six studies (294 surgically treated shoulders) were included in this review. No significant differences between the three available treatment options (acromioplasty with the removal of the calcific deposits, acromioplasty or solely the removal of the calcific deposits) were detected regarding the functional and clinical outcome. The follow-up ranged from 12 mo to 5 years. Complication rates were low. No reoperations were necessary and the only reported complication was adhesive capsulitis, which in all cases could be treated conservatively with full recovery. CONCLUSION: We found that all three available treatment options show good functional and clinical outcomes in the short and midterm. However, a favorable procedure is difficult to determine due to the lack of high-quality comparing studies.