Treatment of Gluteal Tendinopathy: A Systematic Review and Stage-Adjusted Treatment Recommendation

Surgical Treatment and Outcomes for Gluteal Tendon Tears

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Gluteus medius and minimus tears, or hip abductor tendon tears, are increasingly identified as a source of lateral hip pain. Once underappreciated and undertreated, they are now recognized as a cause of greater trochanteric pain syndrome and a pathology amenable to both nonoperative and operative modalities. This review summarizes relevant anatomy, clinical presentation, and treatment options for gluteus medius tears, focusing on surgical options.

RECENT FINDINGS

When surgical intervention is indicated, repair, reconstruction, or tendon transfer may be considered. Open and endoscopic repair techniques demonstrate similar outcomes with improvements in patient-reported outcomes and low complication and retear rates for both partial and full thickness tears. Variations in fixation construct and graft augmentations have been described, though clinical evidence remains limited to support specific techniques. Gluteus maximus transfer via open approach is a salvage option for the severely atrophied, retracted, or revision gluteus tendon; however, persistent limitations in abduction strength and gait abnormalities are common. Emerging evidence continues to evolve our understanding of surgical decision-making for gluteus tendon tears. The current literature supports either open or endoscopic repair techniques and open tendon transfer as a salvAage option. Further study is needed to determine the optimal fixation construct, the role of graft augmentation, and patient-related factors that influence postoperative outcomes.

Is shockwave therapy effective in the management of greater trochanteric pain syndrome? A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Evidence is lacking for the efficacy of shockwave therapy (SWT) in the treatment of greater trochanteric pain syndrome (GTPS).

AIM

To investigate the efficacy of SWT on pain and function in the management of GTPS.

METHODS

A systematic search of electronic databases and grey literature was conducted up to May 2023. Studies utilising SWT on adults for GTPS, providing measures of pain and/or function at baseline and at follow-up were considered for inclusion. Meta-analysis was undertaken using converted pain and functional outcomes. Studies were assessed for quality and risk of bias, and assigned a level of evidence as per the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations criteria.

RESULTS

Twelve articles (n = 1121 subjects) were included, including five randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and seven non-RCTs. No statistical differences were observed for pain over time f(1,5) = 1.349 (p = 0.298) or between SWT and control f(1,5) = 1.782 (p = 0.238). No significant differences in functional outcomes in short- (H = 2.591, p = 0.181) and medium-term follow-up (H = 0.189, p = 0.664) were identified between SWT and control. Moderate magnitude treatment effects for pain (Hedges-G [HG] 0.71) favouring SWT groups over control was identified, decreasing to low for function (HG 0.20). Further pain and functional treatment effects were identified at higher magnitudes across follow-up time-points in SWT groups compared to control.

CONCLUSION

Moderate-quality evidence demonstrated no statistically significant improvements in pain and function post-SWT compared to control. Low-quality evidence established clinical improvements throughout all included studies favouring SWT over control. Consequently, owing to relatively low incidence of side effects, SWT should be considered a viable option for the management of GTPS. Issues with both clinical and statistical heterogeneity of studies and during meta-analysis require consideration, and more robust RCTs are recommended if the efficacy of SWT for the management of GTPS is to be comprehensively determined.

Ultrasound-Guided Subfascial Platelet-Rich Plasma Injections Versus Enthesis Needling for Greater Trochanteric Pain Syndrome: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Background

Greater trochanteric pain syndrome (GTPS) is characterized by gluteal enthesopathy involving the peritrochanteric space and associated with chronic pain and functional impairment. A corticosteroid injection in the trochanteric bursa is the usual palliative treatment for pain. However, it is important to investigate treatment options that will relieve pain in the peritrochanteric space.

Purpose

To compare the clinical efficacy of subfascial platelet-rich plasma (PRP) injection and enthesis needling for GTPS.

Study Design

Randomized controlled trial; Level of evidence, 1.

Methods

A total of 92 patients (90% women; mean age, 55 years old; mean body mass index, 25.3 kg/m2) were randomly divided into a subfascial PRP injection group and an enthesis needling group. Descriptive data and radiographic measurements of the pelvis-including leg-length difference, pelvic width difference, and pelvic trochanteric index-were recorded. The primary outcome measures were the Hip Outcome Score (HOS) activities of daily living (HOS-ADL) and sports-specific (HOS-SS) subscales and the visual analog scale for pain at 3, 6, and 12 months posttreatment. In addition, we evaluated the presence or absence of ultrasound characteristics (fascia nodules, trochanteric bursa distension, and calcium deposits) over time in response to treatment.

Results

Baseline demographic and radiological characteristics were similar between the groups. The PRP group saw significantly greater improvement from baseline to 12 months posttreatment on the HOS-SS subscore compared with the needling group (32.09 [95% CI, 28.99-40.20] vs 20.52 [95% CI, 11.99-29.05]; P = .048). At 3 months, 60% of patients in the PRP group versus 33.3% in the needling group had a reduction in pain compared with a baseline of >20% (P = .040). After subfascial PRP injection, fewer patients had a fascia nodule over the trochanter and/or bursa distension (P = .006 and P = .004, respectively). The pelvic trochanteric index was predictive of HOS-ADL and HOS-SS outcomes (P = .011 and P = .022, respectively). The interaction between treatment modality and fascia nodule influenced HOS-ADL and HOS-SS outcomes (P = .021 and P = .023) as well as the interactions of treatment modality, fascia nodules, and calcifications (P = .027).

Conclusion

Both subfascial PRP injection and enthesis needling resulted in clinical improvements, but the improvement in the HOS-SS was greater in the PRP group.

Registration

NCT04231357 (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier).

Effects of exercise-based interventions on gluteal tendinopathy. Systematic review with meta-analysis

The objective of this review was to evaluate the effect of exercise on pain intensity, function, and quality of life in individuals with gluteal tendinopathy. Searches were carried out in PUBMED, EMBASE, CINAHL, Cochrane Library, and PEDro databases. Randomized or quasi-randomized controlled trials were included. Five studies met the eligibility criteria, comparing exercise-based interventions with minimal interventions and/or corticosteroid injections. Three studies, involving 383 participants, were included in the quantitative analysis. Meta-analyses showed that exercise is superior to minimal intervention for function in short-term [mean difference (MD) = 10.24; 95% confidence interval (95%CI) = 5.98, 14.50) and long-term (MD = 6.54; 95%CI = 1.88, 11.21]). However, no difference was observed for quality of life in the short [standardized mean difference (SMD) = 0.33; 95%CI = -0.29, 0.94] and long-term (SMD = 0.11; 95%CI = -0.16, 0.37). The effect of exercise was no different from that of corticosteroid injections for pain intensity in the short (MD = 1.25; 95%CI = -3.56, 6.05) and long-term (MD = -1.37; 95%CI = -3.72, 0.98]). In conclusion, exercise is superior to minimal interventions for function in the short- and long-term in individuals with gluteal tendinopathy. Exercise and corticosteroid injections had similar effects on pain intensity, however, exercise showed a higher treatment success rate when compared to corticosteroid injections in this population. The GRADE analysis revealed that the certainty of the evidence ranges from low to very low, therefore, large high-quality randomized controlled trials are recommended.PROSPERO registration number: CRD42021242853.

Gluteal Tendinopathy Is Associated With Lower Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in Total Hip Arthroplasty With a Posterior Approach: A Prospective Cohort Study of 1,538 Patients

BACKGROUND

Gluteal tendinopathy (GT) is found in 20 to 25% of patients undergoing total hip arthroplasty (THA). Despite this, there is a scarcity of literature assessing the association between GT and THA outcomes. The aim of this study was to evaluate whether intraoperative diagnosis of GT negatively affected postoperative outcomes.

METHODS

Consecutive patients undergoing primary THA for osteoarthritis via a posterior approach over 5 years were recruited in a prospective study. Gluteal tendinopathy was assessed and graded at the time of surgery, but not repaired. A total of 1,538 (93%) completed the patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) at 1 year after surgery and were included in the analysis. The PROMs included the Oxford Hip Score (OHS), Hip Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score Joint Replacement (HOOS JR), and EuroQol 5-Dimension, and were collected preoperatively and one year after THA.

RESULTS

The gluteal tendons were graded as 4 distinct grades: normal (n = 1,023, 66%), tendinopathy but no tear (n = 337, 22%), partial thickness tear (n = 131, 9%), and full thickness tear (n = 47, 3%). The occurrence of GT was associated with age, body mass index, and sex. There was no significant difference in baseline OHS or HOOS JR scores according to GT grade. As GT grade increased, lower median 1-year OHS (P = .001) and HOOS JR (P = .016) were observed. This association was confirmed by linear regression analysis with 1-year OHS (B = 0.5, 95% CI = -0.9 to -0.1, P = .011) when controlled for age and sex.

CONCLUSIONS

Gluteal tendinopathy was commonly observed and was associated with inferior 1-year PROMs in patients undergoing THA via posterior approach. Increasing degree of tendinopathy was a negative prognostic factor for outcomes and patient satisfaction.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level 2 (High quality prospective cohort study).

Is there structural change on MRI in gluteal tendinopathy after treatment? Single outcome measure extension of an RCT

BACKGROUND

The etiology of tendinopathy remains controversial and it is unknown whether degenerative structural changes in tendinopathies are reversible.

HYPOTHESIS

There will be no structural change on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) taken > 2-years after treatment for gluteal tendinopathy.

STUDY DESIGN

Extension of a single site, double-blind, prospective randomized-controlled trial to analyze the additional outcome measure; MRI changes.

METHODS

University of Melbourne ethics approval number: 1852900, trial registration: ACTRN12613000677707. Participants with gluteal tendinopathy who had previously received a leukocyte-rich platelet-rich plasma injection (LR-PRP) or a corticosteroid injection (CSI) had a post treatment MRI between at least 2-years and up to 7 years following trial completion. A blinded, senior musculoskeletal radiologist graded all de-identified MRI scans using the Melbourne Hip Score (MHIP). The primary outcome measure was the change in overall pre- and post-treatment score.

RESULTS

Participants (n = 20) underwent MRI at mean time of 4.15 (SD 1.11; range 2-7) years after their initial treatment. There was no change in the overall mean MHIP score for the CSI group (Pre 4.3 (SD 2.3) Post 4.3 (SD 1.1), p = 1.00). Although there was an improvement in the LR-PRP group mean MHIP score (Pre 5.3 (SD 3.0) Post 4.77 (SD 2.5), p = 0.56) it was not statistically significant. However, in the LR-PRP intervention group, five out of nine of participants' MHIP score improved, with four of these improving by 2-4 points.

CONCLUSION

The hypothesis that there would be no improvement in MHIP scores following treatment of gluteal tendinopathy was supported. Findings of improvement in the LR-PRP group at 4 years would support further studies powered to look for structural improvement. These findings suggest that structural change following treatment for tendinopathy may be possible supporting the inclusion of MRI as a core outcome for future studies.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

The study suggests that degenerative structural changes in tendons may be reversible.

Gluteal Tendinopathy: Critical Analysis Review of Current Nonoperative Treatments

» Gluteal tendinopathy/greater trochanteric pain syndrome (GTPS) is the most prevalent of all lower limb tendinopathies, affecting 1 in 4 women older than 50 years and commonly individuals within their fifth and sixth decades of life regardless of activity level.» The condition is believed to originate from age-related degenerative changes about the hip abductor tendon insertions and the surrounding bursae, and is exacerbated by congenital and acquired abnormal hip biomechanics.» Treatment of gluteal tendinopathy/GTPS often begins with noninvasive nonoperative modalities such as activity modifications, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, and physical therapy. For recalcitrant symptoms, additional nonoperative therapies have been used; however, there remains a lack of comparative efficacy between these adjunct treatments.» In this article, we examine the available literature regarding the nonoperative management of gluteal tendinopathy/GTPS and provide insight into the effectiveness of current treatment modalities.

Systematic Review of Platelet-Rich Plasma for Low Back Pain

BACKGROUND

Low back pain (LBP) has a high economic burden and is strongly related to the degenerative process of the spine, especially in the intervertebral disc and of the facet joints. Numerous treatment modalities have been proposed for the management of LBP, and the use of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) has emerged as an innovative therapeutic option for degenerative disease of the spine. The present study aims to evaluate the efficacy of PRP injections in managing low back pain.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) recommendations, a registered at PROSPERO Systematic Reviews Platform, under number CRD42021268491. The PubMed, Web of Science, and Scopus databases were searched to identify relevant articles, along with hand searching to identify gray literature articles, with no language restrictions. Randomized clinical trials (RCTs), nonrandomized trials (NRTs), and case series (CSs) with more than 10 patients were considered eligible. The quality assessment and the risk of bias of the randomized clinical trials were evaluated using the RoB II tool. An evaluation of the description of the preparation methods was performed using an adapted version of the MIBO checklist.

RESULTS

An electronic database search resulted in 2324 articles, and after the exclusion of noneligible articles, 13 RCTs and 27 NRTs or CSs were analyzed. Of the 13 RCTs, 11 found favorable results in comparison to the control group in pain and disability, one showed no superiority to the control group, and one was discontinued because of the lack of therapeutic effect at eight-week evaluation. Description of the PRP preparation techniques were found in almost all papers. The overall risk of bias was considered high in 2 papers and low in 11. An adapted MIBO checklist showed a 72.7% compliance rate in the selected areas.

CONCLUSIONS

In this systematic review, we analyzed articles from English, Spanish and Russian language, from large databases and grey literature. PRP was in general an effective and safe treatment for degenerative LPB. Positive results were found in almost studies, a small number of adverse events were related, the risk of bias of the RCTs was low. Based on the evaluation of the included studies, we graded as level II the quality of the evidence supporting the use of PRP in LBP. Large-scale, multicenter RCTs are still needed to confirm these findings.

Ilizaliturri Jr. V, Kohlrieser D, Laskovski J, Lifshitz L, P. McGovern R, Monnington K, O’Donnell J, Takla A, Tyler T, Voight M, Wuerz T, Martin RL. The 2022 International Society for Hip Preservation (ISHA) physiotherapy agreement on assessment and treatment of greater trochanteric pain syndrome (GTPS): an international consensus statement

The 2022 International Society of Hip Preservation (ISHA) physiotherapy agreement on assessment and treatment of greater trochanteric pain syndrome (GTPS) was intended to present a physiotherapy consensus on the assessment and surgical and non-surgical physiotherapy management of patients with GTPS. The panel consisted of 15 physiotherapists and eight orthopaedic surgeons. Currently, there is a lack of high-quality literature supporting non-operative and operative physiotherapy management. Therefore, a group of physiotherapists who specialize in the treatment of non-arthritic hip pathology created this consensus statement regarding physiotherapy management of GTPS. The consensus was conducted using a modified Delphi technique to guide physiotherapy-related decisions according to the current knowledge and expertise regarding the following: (i) evaluation of GTPS, (ii) non-surgical physiotherapy management, (iii) use of corticosteroids and orthobiologics and (iv) surgical indications and post-operative physiotherapy management.

Tendinopathies and Allied Disorders of the Hip

There are many soft tissue structures around the hip joint that may serve as a source of pain in both the native and prosthetic hip. In this review, the role of the gluteal, piriformis, iliopsoas, and rectus femoris musculotendinous units in the etiology of pathology around the hip joint will be discussed. Management options ranging from tailored physical therapy regimens to local steroid infiltration along with more invasive open and arthroscopic surgical techniques will be reviewed for each pathological entity. While not all conditions are well understood, advancements have been made in the management of each of these often challenging cases in both the native and prosthetic hip settings. This review explores these advancing treatment methods which will supplement the practice of any hip surgeon who is presented with problematic tendinopathy around both the native and prosthetic hip joint.

Nearly half of patients with chronic tendinopathy may have a neuropathic pain component, with significant differences seen between different tendon sites: a prospective cohort of more than 300 patients

Objectives

Identifying the prevalence of neuropathic pain components in patients with chronic tendinopathy conditions using the Self-Administered Leeds Assessment of Neuropathic Symptoms and Signs (S-LANSS) questionnaire.

Methods

Patients with chronic tendinopathy and ‘tendon-like’ conditions treated within a single hospital outpatient clinic specialising in tendinopathy were identified. Pain scores, plus global function patient-reported outcome measures (5-Level version of EuroQol-5 Dimension and Musculoskeletal Health Questionnaire (MSK-HQ)), were completed and compared with the S-LANSS questionnaire

Results

341 suitable patients with chronic tendinopathy and potentially similar conditions were identified. Numbers: lateral elbow tendinopathy (39), greater trochanteric pain syndrome (GTPS; 112), patellar tendinopathy (11), non-insertional Achilles tendinopathy (40), insertional Achilles tendinopathy (39), plantar fasciopathy (100). 68% were female, with a mean age of 54.0±11.3 years and a mean symptom duration of 38.1±33.7 months.

There was a mean S-LANSS score of 11.4±6.4. Overall, 47% of patients scored 12 or greater points on S-LANSS, indicating the possible presence of neuropathic pain. The highest proportion was in patients with plantar fasciopathy (61%), the lowest in those with GTPS (33%). Weak correlations were found between the S-LANSS score and MSK-HQ score, the numerical rating scale (0–10) values for ‘average pain’ and for ‘worst pain’, but not with the MSK-HQ %health value.

Conclusion

S-LANSS identified nearly half of patients with chronic tendinopathy as possibly having a neuropathic pain component. This is of unclear clinical significance but worth further study to see if/how this may relate to treatment outcomes. These results are from a single hospital clinic dealing with patients with chronic tendinopathy, without a control group or those with shorter symptom duration. However, this reinforces the probability of neuropathic pain components in at least some patients with chronic tendinopathy.