MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416337003 · doi:10.3390/biomedicines13112801

Regenerative and Drug-Free Strategies for Chronic Musculoskeletal Pain: An Evidence-Based Perspective on Shockwave Therapy, High-Intensity Laser Therapy and Ultrasound-Guided Mechanical Needling with Sterile Water Injection

2025· article· en· W4416337003 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Carl P. C. Chen, Areerat Suputtitada

Bibliographic record

VenueBiomedicines · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTendon Structure and Treatment
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Science and Technology Council
KeywordsDry needlingExtracorporeal shockwave therapyChiropracticRegenerative medicineClinical trialHydrotherapyChronic painRandomized controlled trial

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Chronic musculoskeletal pain (CMP) is the leading global cause of disability and a major contributor to healthcare burden. Its pathogenesis reflects regenerative failure, driven by extracellular matrix (ECM) fibrosis, calcific deposition, mitochondrial dysfunction, and neuroimmune sensitization. Conventional pharmacological therapies such as NSAIDs, corticosteroids, and opioids offer only transient symptomatic relief while exposing patients to systemic complications. In contrast, energy-based, drug-free regenerative interventions directly address underlying pathology and restore physiological function. This Perspective synthesizes recent evidence (2020-2025) on three modalities that together form a regenerative triad: extracorporeal shockwave therapy (ESWT), high-intensity laser therapy (HILT), and ultrasound-guided mechanical needling with sterile water injection (SWI). ESWT promotes mechanotransduction, angiogenesis, and ECM remodeling; HILT enhances mitochondrial bioenergetics and downregulates inflammatory pathways; and SWI disrupts fibrosis and calcification while restoring neurovascular dynamics. Evidence from randomized controlled trials and meta-analyses supports moderate-to-high certainty (GRADE B-A-) for ESWT and HILT. SWI, initially supported by large observational cohorts and comparative studies, is now reinforced by a randomized comparative trial and meta-analyses of lavage effects, justifying an upgrade from moderate (B) to moderate-to-high certainty (B-A-). Risk of bias assessment using Cochrane RoB 2.0 and the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) indicates overall low-to-moderate concerns across modalities. Together, these interventions integrate mechanistic biology with translational rehabilitation practice. This Perspective outlines their mechanistic foundations, clinical evidence, and alignment with the WHO decade of healthy ageing, offering a drug-free, mechanism-based framework for sustainable CMP management.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.099
Threshold uncertainty score0.655

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.031
GPT teacher head0.308
Teacher spread0.277 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiomedicinesSame topicTendon Structure and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207