Active clinical trials for "Tennis Elbow"

The purpose of this clinical research study is to examine whether embolization treatment of an elbow artery is a safe and effective way to treat elbow pain, specifically pain from tennis elbow. Embozene is a medical device made by Varian marketed in the United States for the treatment of hypervascular tumors and arteriovenous malformations. It consists of thousands of microscopic spheres that are injected into the artery to block the flow of blood to a specific region. One of the causes of pain in the setting of tennis elbow is increased blood flow going to the specific area of pain. In this study, we will investigate an experimental procedure to decrease the blood flow (embolize) to the specific region of the elbow that is causing the pain. This will be done by infusing Embozene particles into the specific blood vessel supplying the area of pain in the elbow. This is an investigational study to evaluate the safety and efficacy of elbow artery embolization (EAE) for the treatment of symptomatic lateral epicondylitis (tennis elbow).

Background: Lateral epicondylitis, or tennis elbow, is a common musculoskeletal disorder that causes pain and functional limitation. Although different nonsurgical conservative therapies such as bracing, physical therapy, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, and corticosteroid injections in addition to surgical approaches have been used, yet there is no standard treatment for lateral epicondylitis. Objectives: The primary objective of this study is to assess the effectiveness of nerve stimulator guided radial nerve block for treatment of lateral epicondylitis. The primary outcome measure is pain measured through the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) at 1 and 2 weeks. Methods: This is a prospective randomized, double blind clinical trial. Patients will be randomly allocated into two groups. Group I will receive radial nerve block guided by a nerve stimulator. Group II patients will receive placebo through radial nerve block. Patients will be followed up for 2 weeks.

Lateral epicondylitis (LE) or tennis elbow; is the most common cause of lateral pain in the elbow, with an incidence of 1-3% in the general population. It is thought to develop as a result of overuse inflammation of the wrist joint extensor tendons, originating from the lateral epicondyle of the humerus. The most common symptom is the pain located in the lateral aspect of the elbow, which can spread across the forearm extensor face and is aggravated by wrist extension, forearm supination, and strong grip movements of the hand. The diagnosis is made by clinical and ultrasonographic evaluations. Significant correlations were found between clinical symptoms of LE and increased joint extensor tendon thickness, focal hypoechogenicity, intratendinous calcification, bone abnormality, and diffuse heterogeneity findings that can be monitored by diagnostic ultrasound. Wait-see policy, conservative treatment regimens, local injections, and surgical approaches are the treatment methods that can be used on a patient-based basis until today. Conservative treatment options include physical therapy modalities such as exercise, massage, laser, electrotherapy, therapeutic ultrasound, extracorporeal shock wave therapy, the use of various splints, ice application, activity modification, rest, NSAIDs, and taping methods. The two prominent bracing methods are the lateral epicondylitis band and the wrist extension splint. Although these two methods are frequently used in daily practice, the limitations of studies investigating the effectiveness of orthoses and which orthosis are more effective draw attention. In comparative studies, some factors may affect clinical results such as allowing patients to use NSAIDs when necessary and organizing a home exercise program. Besides, none of them included a control group and the patients were not evaluated by ultrasonography. This study aims to compare the effects of the use of two different splints (lateral epicondylitis band and wrist extension splint) on clinical and ultrasonographic parameters in patients with a diagnosis of lateral epicondylitis.

Lateral epicondylalgia is a common musculoskeletal condition that approximately affects 1-3% of the general population. Several authors have found greater mechanical pain sensitivity in the radial nerve when compared with healthy subjects. Radial tunnel syndrome exhibits a similar clinical presentation to lateral epicondylalgia. Percutaneous electrical stimulation has shown reduce pain in several conditions. Percutaneous electrical stimulation on the radial nerve could cause an important relief in lateral epicondylalgia. Hypothesis: Percutaneous electrical stimulation on radial nerve plus exercise therapy in patients with lateral epicondylalgia is better than sham percutaneous electrical stimulation plus exercise.

In this study, investigators aimed to investigate the effects of rest, steroid injection and dry needling treatments, which are frequently used in the treatment of patients diagnosed with lateral epicondylitis (tennis elbow), on the pain and functional status of the patients.

PLT vs. steroid vs. PLT + steroid, which treatment is most effective in lateral epicondylitis (or tennis elbow) and supraspinatus calcific tendinitis.

The purpose of this study is to compare between the effect of scapular proprioceptive neuromuscular facilitation versus shoulder and scapular strengthening exercise on pain, functional outcome and grip strength in patients with lateral epicondylitis.

The purpose of this study is to compare the clinical effectiveness and outcomes between current evidence based clinical care and use of personalized blood flow restriction training in the treatment of lateral epicondylalgia ("tennis elbow").

The purpose of this study is to find out functional and electromyographical changes after platelet rich plasma and dextrose injection in chronic lateral epicondylitis.

We propose a randomized, double-blind controlled trial comparing arthroscopic release with arthroscopic debridement for the management of chronic tennis elbow in an effort to definitively determine whether arthroscopic tennis elbow release is an effective treatment of tennis elbow, and to further provide better recommendations for the use of this procedure, in an effort to improve patient care.