A prospective study of shoulder pain in primary care: prevalence of imaged pathology and response to guided diagnostic blocks

Angela Cadogan, Mark Laslett, Wayne A Hing, Peter J McNair, Mark H Coates, Angela Cadogan, Mark Laslett, Wayne A Hing, Peter J McNair, Mark H Coates

Abstract

Background: The prevalence of imaged pathology in primary care has received little attention and the relevance of identified pathology to symptoms remains unclear. This paper reports the prevalence of imaged pathology and the association between pathology and response to diagnostic blocks into the subacromial bursa (SAB), acromioclavicular joint (ACJ) and glenohumeral joint (GHJ).

Methods: Consecutive patients with shoulder pain recruited from primary care underwent standardised x-ray, diagnostic ultrasound scan and diagnostic injections of local anaesthetic into the SAB and ACJ. Subjects who reported less than 80% reduction in pain following either of these injections were referred for a magnetic resonance arthrogram (MRA) and GHJ diagnostic block. Differences in proportions of positive and negative imaging findings in the anaesthetic response groups were assessed using Fishers test and odds ratios were calculated a for positive anaesthetic response (PAR) to diagnostic blocks.

Results: In the 208 subjects recruited, the rotator cuff and SAB displayed the highest prevalence of pathology on both ultrasound (50% and 31% respectively) and MRA (65% and 76% respectively). The prevalence of PAR following SAB injection was 34% and ACJ injection 14%. Of the 59% reporting a negative anaesthetic response (NAR) for both of these injections, 16% demonstrated a PAR to GHJ injection. A full thickness tear of supraspinatus on ultrasound was associated with PAR to SAB injection (OR 5.02; p < 0.05). Ultrasound evidence of a biceps tendon sheath effusion (OR 8.0; p < 0.01) and an intact rotator cuff (OR 1.3; p < 0.05) were associated with PAR to GHJ injection. No imaging findings were strongly associated with PAR to ACJ injection (p ≤ 0.05).

Conclusions: Rotator cuff and SAB pathology were the most common findings on ultrasound and MRA. Evidence of a full thickness supraspinatus tear was associated with symptoms arising from the subacromial region, and a biceps tendon sheath effusion and an intact rotator cuff were associated with an intra-articular GHJ pain source. When combined with clinical information, these results may help guide diagnostic decision making in primary care.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Distribution of primary pain required for inclusion in the study.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Diagram showing study procedures, results of diagnostic blocks and dropout explanations. SAB, subacromial bursa; PAR, positive anaesthetic response (≥80% post-injection reduction in pain intensity); ACJ, acromioclavicular joint; GHJ, glenohumeral joint; MR arthrogram, magnetic resonance arthrogram. Numbers refer to the number (n) of subjects.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Prevalence of pathology identified on x-ray. n, number of cases; ACJ, acromioclavicular joint; GHJ, glenohumeral joint
Figure 4
Figure 4
Prevalence of pathology identified on ultrasound scan. (n), number of cases; US, ultrasound; GHJ, glenohumeral joint; SAB, subacromial bursa; CAL, coracoacromial ligament; LHB, long head of biceps tendon. aSubacromial pathology: any one of three present; dimension ≥2 mm, fluid/effusion or calcification. bSubacromial bursa dimensions: <1 mm (71); 1-2 mm (82); 2-3 mm (42); >3 mm (5). cSubacromial bursal effusion associated with full thickness rotator cuff tear (7). dSupraspinatus tears: intrasubstance (23); partial thickness-bursal surface (4); partial thickness-articular surface (8); full thickness (10). eInfraspinatus tears: intrasubstance (1); partial thickness (1); full thickness (1). fSubscapularis tears: intrasubstance (5); partial thickness (4); full thickness (1).
Figure 5
Figure 5
Shoulder x-ray images of ACJ pathology and rotator cuff calcification. a) AP x-ray view in external rotation showing degenerative acromioclavicular joint changes (white arrow); b) outlet view showing calcification in line with the infraspinatus tendon (black arrow).
Figure 6
Figure 6
Ultrasound scan images of subacromial bursa and supraspinatus pathology. a) hypoechoic region (between calipers) indicating an intrasubstance tear within posterior fibres of supraspinatus (longitudinal view) overlying the head of humerus (white arrowhead); b) thickened subacromial bursa (calipers); c) bunching of the SAB (white arrow) under the acromion during dynamic abduction.
Figure 7
Figure 7
Prevalence of subacromial bursa bunching under the acromion and coracoacromial ligament on ultrasound during dynamic abduction. SAB, subacromial bursa; US, ultrasound; CAL, coracoacromial ligament. Percentages are in reference to the number of cases in which bursal bunching was assessed (acromion n = 195; CAL n = 94).
Figure 8
Figure 8
Prevalence of pathology identified on MR arthrogram. (n), number of cases; LHB, long head of biceps tendon; ACJ, acromioclavicular joint; GHJ, glenohumeral joint; OA, osteoarthritis; SAB, subacromial bursa; aACJ degenerative changes: mild (28); moderate (18); severe (5). bAcromioclavicular joint pathology - other: os acromiale (2); unfused acromial ossification centre (1); acromial spur (4); widened joint space/subluxation (2); synovitis (1). cRotator interval pathology: coracohumeral or superior glenohumeral ligament thickening (40); rotator interval synovitis (39); biceps pulley, coracohumeral or superior glenohumeral ligament tear (13). dGlenoid labrum tear: isolated labral tear (5); associated pathology present (39); SLAP tear (20); SLAP Type II (17), Type III (2), Type IV (1); anterior-inferior tear (9); semi- or full circumferential tear (7); posterior-superior tear (1); other tear (9); paralabral cyst (10); paralabral cyst causing suprascapular nerve compression (2). eGlenohumeral joint pathology - other: bony irregularity humeral head without marrow oedema (12); Hill-Sachs lesion (3); intra-articular/osseous body (3); ganglion cyst between coracoacromial and coracohumeral ligaments (1); greater tuberosity fracture (1). fSubacromial bursitis: mild (52); moderate (12); severe (4) gSupraspinatus tears: intrasubstance (11); partial thickness-bursal surface (5); partial thickness articular surface (12); full thickness (7). hInfraspinatus tears: intrasubstance (4); partial thickness (3); full thickness (0) iSubscapularis tears: intrasubstance (4); partial thickness (0); full thickness (2)
Figure 9
Figure 9
MR arthrogram images of shoulder pathology. a) subacromial bursitis - coronal PD fat saturated image showing region of hyperintensity in the subacromial bursa (black arrow); b) partial thickness, articular surface supraspinatus tear (white arrow) - coronal T1 fat saturated image showing contrast extending into the supraspinatus tendon. c) ACJ degenerative changes (white arrow) -coronal PD fat saturated image; d) type III SLAP tear (white arrow) with contrast filling a paralabral cyst (black arrow) which extended into the supraglenoid and suprascapular notch causing neural compression -coronal PD fat saturated image.
Figure 10
Figure 10
Anaesthetic responses to diagnostic blocks. SAB, subacromial bursa; ACJ, acromioclavicular joint; GHJ, glenohumeral joint.

References

    1. van der Windt DAWM, Koes BW, De Jong BA, Bouter LM. Shoulder disorders in general practice: Incidence, patient characteristics, and management. Ann Rheum Dis. 1995;54(12):959–964. doi: 10.1136/ard.54.12.959.
    1. Luime JJ, Koes BW, Hendriksen IJM, Burdorf A, Verhagen AP, Miedema HS, Verhaar JA. Prevalence and incidence of shoulder pain in the general population: a systematic review. Scand J Rheumatol. 2004;33(2):73–81. doi: 10.1080/03009740310004667.
    1. Croft PR, Pope DP, Silman AJ. The clinical course of shoulder pain: prospective cohort study in primary care. Br Med J. 1996;313(7057):601–602.
    1. Urwin M, Symmons D, Allison T, Brammah T, Busby H, Roxby M, Simmons A, Williams G. Estimating the burden of musculoskeletal disorders in the community: the comparative prevalence of symptoms at different anatomical sites, and the relation to social deprivation. Ann Rheum Dis. 1998;57:649–655. doi: 10.1136/ard.57.11.649.
    1. van der Windt DAWM, Koes BW, Bocke AJP, Deville W, de Jong BA, Bounter LM. Shoulder disorders in general practice: prognostic indicators of outcome. Br J Gen Pract. 1996;46:519–523.
    1. Mitchell C, Adebajo A, Hay E, Carr A. Shoulder pain: diagnosis and management in primary care. Br Med J. 2005;331:1124–1128. doi: 10.1136/bmj.331.7525.1124.
    1. Bot SDM, van der Waal JM, Terwee CB, Van der Windt DAWM, Schellevis FG, Bouter LM. Incidence and prevalence of complaints of the neck and upper extremity in general practice. Ann Rheum Dis. 2005;64(1):118–123. doi: 10.1136/ard.2003.019349.
    1. Chakravarty KK, Webley M. Disorders of the shoulder: an often unrecognised cause of disability in elderly people. Br Med J. 1990;300:848–849.
    1. Chard MD, Hazelman R, Hazelman BL, King RH, Reiss BB. Shoulder disorders in the elderly: a community survey. Arthritis Rheum. 1990;34(6):766–769.
    1. Feleus A, Bierma-Zeinstra SM, Miedema HS, Bernsen RM, Berhaar JA, Koes BW. Incidence of non-traumatic complaints of arm, neck and shoulder in general practice. Man Ther. 2008;13:426–433. doi: 10.1016/j.math.2007.05.010.
    1. Ostor AJK, Richards CA, Prevost AT, Speed CA, Hazleman BL. Diagnosis and relation to general health of shoulder disorders presenting to primary care. Rheumatology. 2005;44:800–805. doi: 10.1093/rheumatology/keh598.
    1. Schellingerhout JM, Verhagen AP, Thomas S, Koes BW. Lack of uniformity in diagnostic labeling of shoulder pain: time for a different approach. Man Ther. 2008;13:478–483. doi: 10.1016/j.math.2008.04.005.
    1. Boocock MG, Collier JMK, McNair PJ, Simmonds M, Larmer PJ, Armstrong B. A framework for the classification and diagnosis of work-related upper extremity conditions: systematic review. Semin Arthritis Rheum. 2009;38(4):296–311. doi: 10.1016/j.semarthrit.2007.10.006.
    1. Buchbinder R. Classification of soft-tissue disorders of the neck and upper limb: do they satisfy methodological guidelines? J Clin Epidemiol. 1996;49(2):141–149. doi: 10.1016/0895-4356(95)00519-6.
    1. Hegedus EJ, Goode A, Campbell S, Morin A, Tamaddoni M, Moorman CT, Cook C. Physical examination tests of the shoulder: a systematic review with meta-analysis of individual tests. Br J Sports Med. 2008. pp. 80–92.
    1. Awerbuch MS. The clinical utility of ultrasonography for rotator cuff disease, shoulder impingement syndrome and subacromial bursitis. Med J Aust. 2008;188(1):50–53.
    1. Shahabpour M, Kichouh M, Laridon E, Gielen JL, De Mey J. The effectiveness of diagnostic imaging methods for the assessment of soft tissue and articular disorders of the shoulder and elbow. Eur Radiol. 2008;65(2):194–200. doi: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2007.11.012.
    1. Milgrom C, Schaffler M, Gilbert S, van Holsbeeck M. Rotator-cuff changes in asymptomatic adults. The effect of age, hand dominance and gender. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1995;77:296–298.
    1. Connor PM, Banks DM, Tyson AB, Coumas JS, Alessandro DF. Magnetic resonance imaging of the asymptomatic shoulder of overhead athletes. Am J Sports Med. 2003;31(5):724–727.
    1. Miniaci A, Mascia AT, Salonen DC, Becker EJ. Magnetic resonance imaging of the shoulder in asymptomatic professional baseball pitchers. Am J Sports Med. 2002;30(1):66–73.
    1. Shubin Stein BE, Wiater JM, Pfaff HC, Bigliani LU, Levine WN. Detection of acromioclavicular joint pathology in asymptomatic shoulders with magnetic resonance imaging. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2001;10(3):204–208. doi: 10.1067/mse.2001.113498.
    1. Reilly P, Macleod I, Macfarlane R, Windley J, Emery RJH. Dead men and radiologists don't lie: A review of cadaveric and radiological studies of rotator cuff tear prevalence. Ann R Coll Surg Eng. 2006;88(2):116–121. doi: 10.1308/003588406X94968.
    1. Shubin Stein BE, Ahmad CS, Pfaff CH, Bigliani LU, Levine WN. A comparison of magnetic resonance imaging findings of the acromioclavicular joint in symptomatic versus asymptomatic patients. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2006;15(1):56–59. doi: 10.1016/j.jse.2005.05.013.
    1. Davidson M. The interpretation of diagnostic tests: a primer for physiotherapists. Aust J Physiotherapy. 2002;48:227–233.
    1. De Maeseneer M, Van Roy F, Lenchik L, Shahabpour M, Jacobson J, Ryu KN, Handelberg F, Osteaux M. CT and MR arthrography of the normal and pathologic anterosuperior labrum and labral-bicipital complex. Radiographics. 2000;20(Suppl):67–81.
    1. Sammarco VJ. Os acromiale: frequency, anatomy, and clinical implications. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2000;82(3):394–400.
    1. Cyriax JH. Textbook of Orthopaedic Medicine, Volume 1: Diagnosis of Soft Tissue Lesions. 8. Minneapolis: Balliere Tindall; 1982.
    1. Neer CS. Impingement lesions. Clin Orthop. 1983;173:70–78.
    1. Dreyfuss PH, Michaelsen M, Pauza K, McLarty J, Bogduk N. The value of history and physical examination in diagnosing sacroiliac joint pain. Spine. 1996;21:2594–2602. doi: 10.1097/00007632-199611150-00009.
    1. Strobel K, Pfirrmann CWA, Zanetti M, Nagy L, Hodler J. MRI features of the acromioclavicular joint that predict pain relief from intraarticular injection. Am J Roentgenology. 2003;181:755–760.
    1. Walton J, Mahajan S, Paxinos A. A positive result on both the Paxinos test and bone scan ruled in a diagnosis of acromioclavicular joint pain. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2004;86(A):807–812.
    1. Anderson J, Read JW, Steinweg J. In: Atlas of Imaging in Sports Medicine. 1. Sydney, editor. Vol. 1. Australia: McGraw-Hill Book Company Australia Pty Limited; 1998. The shoulder and arm; pp. 96–129.
    1. McNally EG. Practical Musculoskeletal Ultrasound. 1. London: Churchill Livingstone; 2004.
    1. Backhaus M, Burmester GR, Gerber T, Grassi W, Machold KP, Swen WA, Wakefield RJ, Manger B. Guidelines for musculoskeletal ultrasound in rheumatology. Ann Rheum Dis. 2001;60(7):641–649. doi: 10.1136/ard.60.7.641.
    1. Stoller DW, Wolf EM, Li AE, Nottage WM, Tirman PFJ. In: Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Orthopaedics and Sports Medicine. 3. Stoller DW, editor. Vol. 2. Baltimore: Lippincott Williams and Wilkins; 2007. The Shoulder; pp. 1131–1462.
    1. Flahault A, Cadilhac M, Thomas G. Sample size calculation should be performed for design accuracy in diagnostic test studies. J Clin Epidemiol. 2005;58(8):859–862. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2004.12.009.
    1. Bogduk N. Practice guidelines for spinal diagnostic & treatment procedures. 1. San Francisco: International Spine Intervention Society; 2004.
    1. Speed CA, Hazleman BL. Calcific tendinitis of the shoulder. N Engl J Med. 1999;340(20):1582–1584. doi: 10.1056/NEJM199905203402011.
    1. Farin PU, Jaroma H, Harju A, Soimakallio S. Shoulder impingement syndrome: sonographic evaluation. Radiology. 1990;176(3):845–849.
    1. Kolla S, Motamedi K. Ultrasound evaluation of the shoulder. Semin Musculoskelet Radiol. 2007;11(2):117–125. doi: 10.1055/s-2007-1001877.
    1. Naredo E, Aguado P, De Miguel E, Uson J, Mayordomo L, Gijon-Banos J, Martin-Mola E. Painful shoulder: Comparison of physical examination and ultrasonographic findings. Ann Rheum Dis. 2002;61(2):132–136. doi: 10.1136/ard.61.2.132.
    1. Van Holsbeeck M, Strouse PJ. Sonography of the shoulder: Evaluation of the subacromial-subdeltoid bursa. Am J Roentgenology. 1993;160(3):561–564.
    1. Tsai YH, Huang TJ, Hsu WH, Huang KC, Li YY, Peng KT, Hsu RWW. Detection of subacromial bursa thickening by sonography in shoulder impingement syndrome. Chang Gung Med J. 2007;30(2):135–141.
    1. Le Corroller T, Cohen M, Aswad R, Pauly V, Champsaur P. Sonography of the painful shoulder: Role of the operator's experience. Skeletal Radiol. 2008;37(11):979–986. doi: 10.1007/s00256-008-0539-z.
    1. Bruyn GAW, Naredo E, Moller I, Moragues C, Garrido J, De Bock GH, D'Agostino MA, Filippucci E, Lagnocco A, Backhaus M, Swen WAA, Balint P, Pineda C, Milutinovic S, Kane D, Kaeley G, Narvaez FJ, Wakefield RJ, Narvaez JA, De Augustin J, Schmidt WA. Reliability of ultrasonography in detecting shoulder disease in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Ann Rheum Dis. 2009;68(3):357–361. doi: 10.1136/ard.2008.089243.
    1. Bruyn GAW, Pineda C, Hernandez-Diaz C, Ventura-Rios L, Moya C, Garrido J, Groen H, Pena A, Espinosa R, Moller I, Filippucci E, Iagnocco A, Balint PV, Kane D, D'Agostino MA, Angulo M, Ponte R, Fernandez-Gallardo JM, Naredo E. Validity of ultrasonography and measures of adult shoulder function and reliability of ultrasonography in detecting shoulder synovitis in patients with rheumatoid arthritis using magnetic resonance imaging as a gold standard. Arthritis Care Res. 2010;62(8):1079–1086. doi: 10.1002/acr.20175.
    1. Naredo E, Moller I, Moragues C, De Agustin JJ, Scheel AK, Grassi W, De Miguel E, Backhaus M, Balint P, Bruyn GAW, D'Agostino MA, Filippucci E, Iagnocco A, Kane D, Koski JM, Mayordomo L, Schmidt WA, Swen WAA, Szkudlarek M, Terslev L, Torp-Pedersen S, Uson J, Wakefield RJ, Werner C. Interobserver reliability in musculoskeletal ultrasonography: Results from a "Teach the Teachers" rheumatologist course. Ann Rheum Dis. 2006;65(1):14–19. doi: 10.1136/ard.2005.037382.
    1. Sher JS, Uribe JW, Posada A, Murphy BJ, Zlatkin MB. Abnormal findings on magnetic resonance images of asymptomatic shoulders. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1995;77(1):10–15.
    1. Yamanaka K, Matsumoto T. The joint side tear of the rotator cuff. A followup study by arthrography. Clin Orthop Rel Res. 1994;304:68–73.
    1. Ottenheijm RP, Jansen MJ, Staal JB, Van Den Bruel A, Weijers RE, De Bie RA, Dinant GJ. Accuracy of diagnostic ultrasound in patients with suspected subacromial disorders: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Arch Phys Med Rehab. 2010;91(10):1616–1625. doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2010.07.017.
    1. Middleton WD, Teefey SA, Yamaguchi K. Sonography of the rotator cuff: Analysis of interobserver variability. Am J Roentgenology. 2004;183(5):1465–1468.
    1. Sher JS, Iannotti JP, Williams GR, Herzog RJ, Kneeland JB, Lisser S, Patel N. The effect of shoulder magnetic resonance imaging on clinical decision making. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 1998;7(3):205–209. doi: 10.1016/S1058-2746(98)90045-3.
    1. Alasaarela E, Takalo R, Tervonen O, Hakala M, Suramo I. Sonography and MRI in the evaluation of painful arthritic shoulder. Br J Rheumatol. 1997;36(9):996–1000. doi: 10.1093/rheumatology/36.9.996.
    1. Ardic F, Kahraman Y, Kacar M, Kahraman MC, Findikoglu G, Yorgancioglu ZR. Shoulder impingement syndrome: relationships between clinical, functional and radiologic findings. Am J Phys Med Rehabil. 2005;85(1):53–60.
    1. Chang D, Mohana-Borges A, Borso M, Chung CB. SLAP lesions: Anatomy, clinical presentation, MR imaging diagnosis and characterization. Eur Radiol. 2008;68(1):72–87. doi: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2008.02.026.
    1. Walch G, Boileau P, Noel E, Donell ST. Impingement of the deep surface of the supraspinatus tendon on the posterosuperior glenoid rim: An arthroscopic study. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 1992;1(5):238–245. doi: 10.1016/S1058-2746(09)80065-7.
    1. Pradhan RL, Itoi E. Rotator interval lesions of the shoulder joint. Orthopedics. 2001;24(8):798–801.
    1. Middleton WD, Reinus WR, Totty WG. US of the biceps tendon apparatus. Radiology. 1985;157(1):211–215.
    1. Iagnocco A, Coari G, Leone A, Valesini G. Sonographic study of painful shoulder. Clin Exp Rheumatol. 2003;21(3):355–358.
    1. Iagnocco A, Filippucci E, Meenagh G, Delle Sedie A, Riente L, Bombardieri S, Grassi W, Valesini G. Ultrasound imaging for the rheumatologist. I ultrasonography of the shoulder. Clin Exp Rheumatol. 2006;24(1):6–11.
    1. Lange U, Piegsa M, Teichmann J, Neeck G. Ultrasonography of the glenohumeral joints: A helpful instrument in differentiation in elderly onset rheumatoid arthritis and polymyalgia rheumatica. Rheumatol Int. 2000;19(5):185–189. doi: 10.1007/s002960000051.
    1. Peat J, Barton B. In: Medical Statistics: A guide to data analysis and critical appraisal. 1. Banks M, editor. Massachusetts: Blackwell Publishing Inc; 2005. Categorical variables: risk statistics; pp. 241–266.
    1. Arrol B, Robb G, Kool B, Astley T, Ball C, Carroll M, Durie R, Gendal P, Hanna C, Kofoed R, Mayhew J, Moran R, Reid D, Watt J. The diagnosis and management of soft tissue shoulder injuries and related disorders: best practice evidence-based guideline. Accident Compensation Corporation; 2004.

Source: PubMed

Sponsors en medewerkers

Medische omstandigheden

Geneesmiddelinterventies

3
Abonneren