Warning: file_get_contents(https://eutils.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/eutils/elink.fcgi?dbfrom=pubmed&id=28348110
&cmd=llinks): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 215
Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 229.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534
Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 229.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534
Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 229.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534
Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 229.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534
Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 229.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534
Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 229.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534
Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 229.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534
Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 229.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534
Warning: imagejpeg(C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\phplern\28348110
.jpg): Failed to open stream: No such file or directory in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 117 BMJ
2017 ; 356
(ä): j656
Nephropedia Template TP
gab.com Text
Twit Text FOAVip
Twit Text #
English Wikipedia
Low intensity pulsed ultrasound for bone healing: systematic review of randomized
controlled trials
#MMPMID28348110
Schandelmaier S
; Kaushal A
; Lytvyn L
; Heels-Ansdell D
; Siemieniuk RA
; Agoritsas T
; Guyatt GH
; Vandvik PO
; Couban R
; Mollon B
; Busse JW
BMJ
2017[Feb]; 356
(ä): j656
PMID28348110
show ga
Objective To determine the efficacy of low intensity pulsed ultrasound (LIPUS)
for healing of fracture or osteotomy.Design Systematic review and
meta-analysis.Data sources Medline, Embase, CINAHL, Cochrane Central Register of
Controlled Trials, and trial registries up to November 2016.Study
selection Randomized controlled trials of LIPUS compared with sham device or no
device in patients with any kind of fracture or osteotomy.Review methods Two
independent reviewers identified studies, extracted data, and assessed risk of
bias. A parallel guideline committee (BMJ Rapid Recommendation) provided input on
the design and interpretation of the systematic review, including selection of
outcomes important to patients. The GRADE system was used to assess the quality
of evidence.Results 26 randomized controlled trials with a median sample size of
30 (range 8-501) were included. The most trustworthy evidence came from four
trials at low risk of bias that included patients with tibia or clavicle
fractures. Compared with control, LIPUS did not reduce time to return to work
(percentage difference: 2.7% later with LIPUS, 95% confidence interval 7.7%
earlier to 14.3% later; moderate certainty) or the number of subsequent
operations (risk ratio 0.80, 95% confidence interval 0.55 to 1.16; moderate
certainty). For pain, days to weight bearing, and radiographic healing, effects
varied substantially among studies. For all three outcomes, trials at low risk of
bias failed to show a benefit with LIPUS, while trials at high risk of bias
suggested a benefit (interaction P<0.001). When only trials at low risk of bias
trials were considered, LIPUS did not reduce days to weight bearing (4.8% later,
4.0% earlier to 14.4% later; high certainty), pain at four to six weeks (mean
difference on 0-100 visual analogue scale: 0.93 lower, 2.51 lower to 0.64 higher;
high certainty), and days to radiographic healing (1.7% earlier, 11.2% earlier to
8.8% later; moderate certainty).Conclusions Based on moderate to high quality
evidence from studies in patients with fresh fracture, LIPUS does not improve
outcomes important to patients and probably has no effect on radiographic bone
healing. The applicability to other types of fracture or osteotomy is open to
debate.Systematic review registration PROSPERO CRD42016050965.