Konstantinos Tsikopoulos1, Haris S Vasiliadis2, Dimitris Mavridis3,4. 1. 1st Orthopaedic Department, 424 Army General Training Hospital, Thessaloniki, Greece. 2. Orthopaedie Sonnenhof, Bern, Switzerland. 3. Department of Hygiene and Epidemiology, University of Ioannina, Ioannina, Greece. 4. Department of Primary Education, University of Ioannina, Ioannina, Greece.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy of different injection therapies for plantar fasciopathy (historically known as 'plantar fasciitis'). DESIGN: Systematic review and network meta-analysis. DATA SOURCES: Electronic databases (MEDLINE, CENTRAL, Web of Science and Scopus) were searched up to 11 July 2015 for completed studies. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES: We considered randomised trials comparing various injection therapies in adults with plantar fasciopathy. The primary outcome was pain relief. Secondary outcomes included functional disability, composite and health-related outcomes. All outcomes were assessed (1) in the short term (up to 2 months), (2) the intermediate term (2-6 months) and (3) the medium term (more than 6 months to 2 years). Quality assessment was performed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. RESULTS: We included 22 trials comprising 1216 patients. Dehydrated amniotic membrane injections were significantly superior to corticosteroids in the short term in achieving the primary and composite outcomes (mean difference (MD) in visual analogue scale (VAS) was -7.32, 95% CIs -11.2 to -3.38; and MD in the foot health status questionnaire was 31.2, 95% CIs 13.9 to 48.6, respectively). For pain relief, botulinum toxin-A provided a significant short-term advantage over placebo, which was still present at 6 months (MD in VAS was -2.9, 95% CIs -4.44 to -1.39; and MD -4.34, 95% CIs -7.18 to -1.54, respectively). SUMMARY: Although the dehydrated amniotic membrane provided significant clinical relief at 0-2 months, there were no data about this treatment at 2 months and beyond. Botulinum toxin-A injections significantly reduced pain intensity at 0-6 months. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42015017353. Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://www.bmj.com/company/products-services/rights-and-licensing/.
OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy of different injection therapies for plantar fasciopathy (historically known as 'plantar fasciitis'). DESIGN: Systematic review and network meta-analysis. DATA SOURCES: Electronic databases (MEDLINE, CENTRAL, Web of Science and Scopus) were searched up to 11 July 2015 for completed studies. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES: We considered randomised trials comparing various injection therapies in adults with plantar fasciopathy. The primary outcome was pain relief. Secondary outcomes included functional disability, composite and health-related outcomes. All outcomes were assessed (1) in the short term (up to 2 months), (2) the intermediate term (2-6 months) and (3) the medium term (more than 6 months to 2 years). Quality assessment was performed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. RESULTS: We included 22 trials comprising 1216 patients. Dehydrated amniotic membrane injections were significantly superior to corticosteroids in the short term in achieving the primary and composite outcomes (mean difference (MD) in visual analogue scale (VAS) was -7.32, 95% CIs -11.2 to -3.38; and MD in the foot health status questionnaire was 31.2, 95% CIs 13.9 to 48.6, respectively). For pain relief, botulinum toxin-A provided a significant short-term advantage over placebo, which was still present at 6 months (MD in VAS was -2.9, 95% CIs -4.44 to -1.39; and MD -4.34, 95% CIs -7.18 to -1.54, respectively). SUMMARY: Although the dehydrated amniotic membrane provided significant clinical relief at 0-2 months, there were no data about this treatment at 2 months and beyond. Botulinum toxin-A injections significantly reduced pain intensity at 0-6 months. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42015017353. Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://www.bmj.com/company/products-services/rights-and-licensing/.
Authors: Manuel González-Sánchez; Esther Velasco-Ramos; Maria Ruiz Muñoz; Antonio I Cuesta-Vargas Journal: J Foot Ankle Res Date: 2016-12-16 Impact factor: 2.303