Background The present study compared the clinical effect of extracorporeal shock wave therapy (ESWT) with that of ultrasound (US)-guided shoulder steroid injection therapy in patients with supraspinatus tendinitis. We hypothesized that the two treatments would show comparable results. Methods The inclusion criteria were age over 20 years and diagnosis of supraspinatus tendinitis using US. Ultimately, 26 patients were assigned using blocked randomization: 13 in the US-guided shoulder injection group and 13 in the ESWT group. Treatment outcomes were evaluated using the pain visual analog scale (pVAS), the American Shoulder and Elbow Society (ASES) score, and the Constant score at baseline and at 1 and 3 months after the procedure. Results At 1 month after the intervention, pVAS, ASES, and constant score were significantly higher in the US-guided shoulder injection group than in the ESWT group, but not at 3 months after the intervention. Both groups showed clinically significant treatment effects at 3 months after the intervention compared to baseline. No significance was shown using equivalence testing. Conclusions US-guided shoulder injection therapy was not superior to ESWT therapy. Considering the complications and rebound phenomenon of steroid injections, interventions using ESWT may be a good alternative to treat patients with supraspinatus tendinitis.

Background: Bionic surface nanopatterns of titanium (Ti) materials have excellent antibacterial effects in vitro for infection prevention. To date, there is a lack of knowledge about the in vivo bactericidal outcomes of the nanostructures on the Ti implant surfaces. Methods: A systematic review was performed using the PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases to better understand surface nanoscale patterns’ in vivo antibacterial efficacy. The inclusion criteria were preclinical studies (in vivo) reporting the antibacterial activity of nanopatterns on Ti implant surface. Ex vivo studies, studies not evaluating the antibacterial activity of nanopatterns or surfaces not modified with nanopatterns were excluded. Results: A total of five peer-reviewed articles met the inclusion criteria. The included studies suggest that the in vivo antibacterial efficacy of the nanopatterns on Ti implants’ surfaces seems poor. Conclusions: Given the small number of literature results, the variability in experimental designs, and the lack of reporting across studies, concluding the in vivo antibacterial effectiveness of nanopatterns on Ti substrates’ surfaces remains a big challenge. Surface coatings using metallic or antibiotic elements are still practical approaches for this purpose. High-quality preclinical data are still needed to investigate the in vivo antibacterial effects of the nanopatterns on the implant surface.

No abstract

No abstract