Table 1 Characteristics of studies and intervention details for rotator cuff calcifying tendinitis
Author (year) | Study design | N | Mean age ±SD or (range) | Mean symptoms duration ± SD or (range), months | Area of SWT application | Dosage in impulses*EFD (mJ/mm2)/bar | No. of sessions | Interval between sessions | Co- intervention, anesthesia |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Albert (2007) [20] | RCT | 40 each group | High SWT: 46.6 (31–64) Low SWT: 47.5 (32–69) | High SWT: 41.2 (6–120) Low SWT: 36.4 (7–160) | Calcific deposit was identified using fluoroscopy | High SWT: 2000*0.45 Low SWT: 2000*0.02 | 2 | 14 days | None, yes |
Cacchio (2006) [21] | RCT | 45 | 56.12 ± 1.98 | 14 ± 4.95 | Seated with shoulder abducted at 45o in external rotation, elbow at 90o, SWT was placed in the direction of calcifications. | 2500*0.1, pressure of 2.5 bar | 4 | 1 week | None |
Charrin (2001) [22] | Prospective open design | 32 | 49.8 ± 5.9 | 52.1 ± 48.5 | Ultrasound was used to identify the lesions and aimed at the calcific deposit at all times. | 2000*0.32 | 2 or 3 | 13.4 ± 6.4 days | None |
Cosentino (2003) [23] | RCT | 35 | 51.8 | 15 (10–20) | SWT was placed in the direction of the calcification based on sonographic examination | 1200*0.28 | 4 | 4–7 days | None |
Daecke (2002) [24] | Prospective comparative design | Group A: 56 Group B: 59 | 49 (28–77) | 5 (1–36) years | SWT was performed after localization of the calcification in 2 planes by fluoroscopy | 2000*0.3 | Group A: 1 Group B: 2 | 1 week | None, yes |
DeBoer (2017) [25] | RCT | 14 | 53 (95%CI 48, 58) | > 6 | NR | 2500*0.1, pressure of 2.5 bar | 5 | 1 week | None |
DelCastillo-Gonzalez (2016) [26] | RCT | 80 | 49 ± 7 | NR | The calcification was identified by fluoroscopy in seated position | 2000* 0.2 | 8 | Twice weekly | None |
Farr (2011) [27] | RCT | 15 | 49.7 ± 9 | > 6 | The calcific deposit was located by fluoroscopy. The computer calculated angle and distance for maximum precision. | Group A: 3200*0.3 Group B: 1600*0.2 | Group A: 1 Group B: 2 | 1 week | None, yes |
Gerdesmeyer (2003) [28] | RCT | 48 each | High: 51.6 ± 8.5 Low: 47.3 ± 8.5 placebo: 52.3 ± 9.8 | High: 42.6 ± 23.2 Low: 42.8 ± 25.2 placebo: 41.3 ± 28.6 | Using fluoroscopy in prone position as the shoulder was rotated until the calcific deposit was identified | High: 1500*0.32 Low: 6000*0.08 | 2 | 14 days | All groups received 10 physiotherapy sessions after SWT, no |
Hsu (2008) [29] | RCT | 33 | 54.4 (30–70) | 12.3 (6–72) | NR | 1000*0.55 | 2 | 14 days | None, yes |
Jakobeit (2002) [30] |  | 80 | 53.3 | > 6 | SWT was performed with retroversion and adduction of the shoulder as far as possible under ultrasound monitoring | 1800*0.42 | 1–5 | 4–6 weeks | None, yes |
Kim (2014) [31] | RCT | 29 | 57.4 (47–78) | > 3 | SWT was performed in the sitting position by aiming at the maximum sore spot according to anatomic targeting | 1000*0.36 | 3 | 1 week | NSAIDs, no |
Kransy (2005) [32] | RCT | 40 | 49.4 (32.4–63.5) | 30.5 (12–60) | In prone position, the calcific deposit had been positioned in the center of the scan unit. | 2500*0.36 | 1 | NA | None, yes |
Loew (1999) [33] | RCT | 20 each | 46 (28–77) | 36 | The calcification was visualized using fluoroscopy before and at intervals during treatment. | Group 1: 2000*0.1 Group 2,3: 2000*0.3 | Group 1,2: 1 Group 3: 2 | 1 week | None, yes |
Lowe (1995) [34] | Prospective open design | 20 | 50 (35–72) | > 12 | SWT was performed as localization of the calcium deposit was achieved with an image intensifier that was adjusted automatically in two planes. The head was placed in a ventro-lateral position | 2000*18–22 kV | 2 | 2 weeks | None, yes |
Moretti (2005) [35] | Prospective open design | 54 | 43 (34–66) | > 3 | NR | 2500*0.11 | 4 | 3 days | None |
Pan (2003) [36] | RCT | 32 | 55.21 ± 2.01 | 24.55 ± 6.45 | SWT was positioned at the marked painful area as defined by sonography before each treatment | 2000*0.26–0.32 | 2 | 14 days | None |
Pigozzi (2000) [37] | Prospective open design | 19 | 38 (18–69) | > 2 | NR | 2000*0.21 | 8 | 1 week | None |
Pleiner (2004) [38] | RCT | 23 (31) | 54 ± 11 | > 6 | SWT was focused on the point of maximum pain | 2000*0.28 | 2 | 14 days | None |
Rompe (1995) [39] | Prospective open design | 40 | 47 | 25 (12–120) | SWT was administered once the calcium deposit is situated in the center of the C-arm. | 1500*0.28 | 1 | NA | None, yes |
Rompe (2001) [40] | prospective quasi-randomized | 50 | 49.6 ± 7.5 | 52.6 ± 54.4 | SWT was administered once the calcium deposit is situated in the center of the C-arm | 3000*0.6 | 1 | NA | Active exercise for 4 to 6 weeks, yes |
Sabeti-Aschraf (2005) [41] | RCT | 25 each | 52.68 ± 8.19 | > 6 | In group 1, the angle and distance between the SWT and shoulder were adjusted until the patient reported to the point of maximum tenderness. In group 2, the Lithotrack device was used to locate the calcium deposit in the center of a crosshairs by fluoroscopy in 2 planes. The computer calculated the angle and distance to provide maximum precision. | 1000*0.08 | 3 | 1 week | None |
Tornese (2011) [42] | RCT | 35 | 52.6 | NR | Group A (Neutral position): the subject lay supine with shoulder in neutral rotation, the arm placed alongside the trunk and the hand resting on the abdomen Group B (Hyperextended internal rotation): the subject lay supine with shoulder in hyperextension and internal rotation with the hand placed under the buttock and the palm facing down | 1800*0.22 | 3 | 1 week | None |