单位：[1]Beijing University of Chinese Medicine, Beijing 100029, China[2]Departmentof Orthopaedic Surgery, China-Japan Friendship Hospital, Beijing 100029,China[3]Institute of Medical Technology, Peking University Health ScienceCenter, Peking University Third Hospital, Beijing 100089, China[4]GraduateSchool of Peking Union Medical College, Chinese Academy of MedicalSciences, Beijing 100730, China
Background: Many studies have demonstrated the effectiveness of extracorporeal shock wave therapy (ESWT) and local corticosteroid injection (LCI) for the treatment of carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS), and some studies showed that the effect of ESWT was superior to LCI. We performed this meta-analysis to compare the clinical effects across the two therapies. Methods: Relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing ESWT and LCI for the treatment of CTS were searched in electronic database. The Cochrane risk bias tool was used for quality assessment. After data extraction and quality assessment of the included studies, a meta-analysis was performed using RevMan 5.3 software. Mean differences (MDs), odds ratios (ORs), and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were analyzed. The protocol for this systematic review was registered on INPLASY (202080025) and is available in full on the inplasy.com (httpsi/doi. org/10.37766/inplasy2020.8.0025) Results: A total of 5 RCT studies with 204 patients were included from the electronic database. The meta-analysis results showed that two therapies were not significantly different in terms of visual analog scale (VAS) score (P = 0.65), Boston Carpal Tunnel Questionnaire (BQ) score (P = 0.14), sensory distal latency (P = 0.66), and nerve conduction velocity (NCV) of the sensory nerve (P = 0.06). There were significant differences between the results of motor distal latency (P < 0.0001), compound muscle action potential (CMAP) amplitude (P < 0.00001), and sensory nerve action potential (SNAP) amplitude (P = 0.004). Conclusions: In terms of pain relief and function improvement, the effects of ESWT and LCI are not significantly different. In terms of electrophysiological parameters, LCI has a stronger effect on shortening motor distal latency; ESWT is superior to LCI in improving action potential amplitude. ESWT is a noninvasive treatment with fewer complications and greater patient safety. In light of the heterogeneity and limitations, these conclusions require further research for definitive conclusions to be drawn.
第一作者单位：[1]Beijing University of Chinese Medicine, Beijing 100029, China[2]Departmentof Orthopaedic Surgery, China-Japan Friendship Hospital, Beijing 100029,China
共同第一作者：
通讯作者：
推荐引用方式(GB/T 7714)：
Li Wenhao,Dong Chunke,Wei Hongyu,et al.Extracorporeal shock wave therapy versus local corticosteroid injection for the treatment of carpal tunnel syndrome: a meta-analysis[J].JOURNAL of ORTHOPAEDIC SURGERY and RESEARCH.2020,15(1):doi:10.1186/s13018-020-02082-x.
APA：
Li, Wenhao,Dong, Chunke,Wei, Hongyu,Xiong, Zhencheng,Zhang, Liubo...&Tan, Mingsheng.(2020).Extracorporeal shock wave therapy versus local corticosteroid injection for the treatment of carpal tunnel syndrome: a meta-analysis.JOURNAL of ORTHOPAEDIC SURGERY and RESEARCH,15,(1)
MLA：
Li, Wenhao,et al."Extracorporeal shock wave therapy versus local corticosteroid injection for the treatment of carpal tunnel syndrome: a meta-analysis".JOURNAL of ORTHOPAEDIC SURGERY and RESEARCH 15..1(2020)
