MUA's Efficacy in Frozen Shoulder in Patients Which Already Received an Hidrodilatation

Overview

Hidrodilatation alone is as efective as Hidrodilatation + Movilization under anesthesia to treat the frozen shoulder

"Frozen shoulder" disease is a pathological entity defined by the presence of a painful shoulder accompanied by restricted mobility. It affects 2% of the population with a slight predominance in women and the average age ranges between 40 and 60 years. The diagnosis of frozen shoulder is clinical and by exclusion; it presents with constant pain, especially at night, which increases on sudden mobilization, with restriction of at least two axes of shoulder mobility, especially external rotation and abduction. The initial treatment of these patients is always conservative and consists of the association of pharmacological treatment (analgesics and anti-inflammatory drugs) together with a specific rehabilitation program. However, in many cases recovery is not complete and many patients require additional more invasive treatments. Hydrodilation is a technique described in 1965 that consists of infiltrating 20-40 cc of serum into the glenohumeral joint to distend the joint capsule. In most cases, it is also associated with intra-articular corticosteroid and anesthetic infiltration to add an anti-inflammatory and anesthetic effect to joint distention. Several studies have shown good results with this treatment, however, many patients persist with pain and significant functional limitations despite this treatment. Joint Mobilization Under general Anesthesia (MUA) is a more invasive alternative therapeutic technique that consists of a controlled mobilization under general anesthesia to break the synovial adhesions and the joint capsule, with the objective of increasing the range of motion. Several studies have evaluated the effectiveness and safety of this treatment, considered today a valid option for the treatment of frozen shoulder refractory to more conservative treatment. Some studies have already compared the effectiveness of hydrodilatation with MUA as treatments for frozen shoulder. Jacob et al. demonstrated the same effectiveness between hydrodilatation and MUA, however, MUA reported a higher rate of iatrogenesis: hemarthrosis and lesions in the labrum, glenohumeral ligament or subscapularis ligament. However, there is no study evaluating the synergy of both techniques in the treatment of painful shoulder. The aim of the present study is to assess the clinical efficacy of the combination of hydrodilatation and MUA in patients with frozen shoulder and to compare it with hydrodilatation alone.

Conditions

Interventions

Eligibility

Locations (1)

Outcomes

Central Contacts