US-Guided Therapy of Calcific Tendinopathy: Clinical and Radiological Outcome Assessment in Shoulder and Non-Shoulder Tendons
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To analyze the effectiveness and complication rate of ultrasound (US)-guided perforation and lavage using a two-needle technique with 16 - 18 G needles in the treatment of patients with calcific tendinopathy in the shoulder, elbow, hip, and knee by radiological and clinical follow-up. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective chart review was performed and 40 patients (13 male, 27 female; mean age, 53.5 years; range 24 -74 years) were identified as having received US-guided perforation and lavage due to symptomatic calcific tendinopathy of the rotator cuff tendons, triceps, extensor and flexor tendons at the elbow, rectus femoris tendon and patellar tendons. The radiographic outcome was assessed by comparison of the size and quality of the calcification before and 6 weeks after the procedure. On US images, the quality of the acoustic shadow was assessed, together with other alterations of the tendon and surrounding tissue. Patients were interviewed by telephone to assess the clinical outcome regarding pre-treatment and post-treatment pain and tendon function. RESULTS: 34 shoulder tendons and 6 non-shoulder tendons were identified. The mean calcium reduction was 39.9 mm(2) (range, 0 - 215; p < 0.001), while 80 % of patient showed a resolution of more than 60 % resulting in good clinical improvement. A very low complication rate was found (1 partial tear). CONCLUSION: The US-guided perforation and lavage technique is an effective and safe treatment for rotator cuff calcifications as well as for other body tendons. Although the two-needle technique and large needles were used in this study, a very low complication rate was detected.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".