Skip to main content
medRxiv
  • Home
  • About
  • Submit
  • ALERTS / RSS
Advanced Search

Effectiveness of prolotherapy vs local anesthetic infiltration guided by ultrasound in the treatment of shoulder pain syndrome

View ORCID ProfileJuan A. Lira-Lucio, View ORCID ProfileGuillermo Ochoa-Gaítan, View ORCID ProfileLizeth Hernández-Escobar, Christian I. Padilla-Rivera, Berenice C. Hernández Porras, Ángel M. Juarez-Lemus, Jose Guillermo Ochoa-Millan, View ORCID ProfileRoberto J. Jimenez-Contreras, View ORCID ProfileEnrique Roldán-Rodríguez
doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.12.22.20248223
Juan A. Lira-Lucio
1Anestesia Integral de la Mujer, Gynecology and obstetrics, Centro Medico ABC, Mexico City, Mexico
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Juan A. Lira-Lucio
Guillermo Ochoa-Gaítan
1Anestesia Integral de la Mujer, Gynecology and obstetrics, Centro Medico ABC, Mexico City, Mexico
2Gynecology and obstetrics, Institution, Centro Medico ABC, Mexico City, Mexico
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Guillermo Ochoa-Gaítan
Lizeth Hernández-Escobar
1Anestesia Integral de la Mujer, Gynecology and obstetrics, Centro Medico ABC, Mexico City, Mexico
2Gynecology and obstetrics, Institution, Centro Medico ABC, Mexico City, Mexico
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Lizeth Hernández-Escobar
Christian I. Padilla-Rivera
1Anestesia Integral de la Mujer, Gynecology and obstetrics, Centro Medico ABC, Mexico City, Mexico
3Anesthesiology, Orthopedia and trauma, IMSS Hospital de Ortopedia “Dr. Victorio de la Fuente Narvaez”, Mexico City, Mexico
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Berenice C. Hernández Porras
4Algology Department, Instituto Nacional de Cancerología, Mexico City, Mexico
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Ángel M. Juarez-Lemus
4Algology Department, Instituto Nacional de Cancerología, Mexico City, Mexico
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Jose Guillermo Ochoa-Millan
1Anestesia Integral de la Mujer, Gynecology and obstetrics, Centro Medico ABC, Mexico City, Mexico
5Anesthesiology, Hospital Real San Jose, Guadalajara, Mexico
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Roberto J. Jimenez-Contreras
6Anesthesiology, Centro Medico ABC, Mexico City, Mexico
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Roberto J. Jimenez-Contreras
Enrique Roldán-Rodríguez
1Anestesia Integral de la Mujer, Gynecology and obstetrics, Centro Medico ABC, Mexico City, Mexico
2Gynecology and obstetrics, Institution, Centro Medico ABC, Mexico City, Mexico
4Algology Department, Instituto Nacional de Cancerología, Mexico City, Mexico
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Enrique Roldán-Rodríguez
  • For correspondence: eroldan@anestesiaintegralmujer.com
  • Abstract
  • Full Text
  • Info/History
  • Metrics
  • Data/Code
  • Preview PDF
Loading

BACKGROUND

Chronic Shoulder Pain (CSP) is a health problem that affects almost 67% of the general population. Almost a third of patients with acute shoulder pain syndrome don’t respond to initial therapy with analgesics and need interventional therapy. Corticosteroid injection is the standard therapy. Prolotherapy has been demonstrated to be effective in other chronic pain syndromes, but not in CSP. The aim of this study was to determine the effectiveness of prolotherapy compared to local anesthetic injection in the treatment of chronic shoulder pain

METHODS Retrospective and comparative study of 77 patients from the National Institute of Oncology in Mexico City who received treatment for Chronic Shoulder Pain guided by ultrasound between 2017-2019. 57 patients were kept in the study for further analysis. 39 received infiltration with corticosteroids and 17 prolotherapy. Effectiveness of therapies was determined based on the decrease in VAS score in next follow-up session. Statistical analysis were performed with SPSS and RStudio Software.

RESULTS 51% of patients with Chronic Shoulder Pain were unemployed. 84% of the patients needed 3 different types of analgesics before they received ultrasound guided local treatment. Prolotherapy was as efficient as local anesthetic injection, no matter basal pain severity or underlying shoulder diagnosis, despite prolotherapy being more used as treatment for Rotator Cuff Tendinopathy.

CONCLUSIONS Prolotherapy and corticosteroid injection guided by ultrasound have the same efficacy in pain relief for chronic shoulder pain in oncologic patients.

1. Introduction

Chronic Shoulder Pain (CSP) is a health problem that affects almost 67% of the general population with high economic and lifestyle burden 1. Patients with an oncologic disease have an increased risk of developing shoulder pain after surgical interventions, radiotherapy, and the pathologic features of their underlying disease23. Even with pharmacologic treatment, almost a third part of patients with acute shoulder pain syndrome don’t respond to initial therapy with acetaminophen, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) or muscle relaxants and will develop chronic shoulder pain.4 If initial therapy, such as NSAIDs, rest, and physical rehabilitation, fail to relieve pain and improve function, the second line of treatment may non-invasive treatment as local anesthetic injection or prolotherapy 5.

Local corticosteroid (CS) infiltration is the second most common non-surgical therapy used to treat CSP, after the use of multiple analgesics. Almost 11% of patients with shoulder pain receive CS local infiltration in primary care 6. There is uncertainty about CS injection efficacy as therapy of shoulder pain after recent evidence that demonstrate a small and transient pain relief without additional benefit to other therapies. Anesthetic infiltration and physical therapy show equal long-term results for function, range of motion and patient-perceived improvement 78. Additionally, CS injections display multiple adverse effects, such as rotator cuff tendon degeneration, exacerbation of neuropathic pain and delay in tissue repair and tendon necrosis, possibly secondary to an increase of oxidative stress by an increase of glutamate receptor NMDAR1 that promote apoptosis after injection of CS9.

Prolotherapy (PT) is a non-surgical technique for the treatment of chronic painful musculoskeletal conditions. It’s based in the infiltration of local tissues with irritating agents to promote fibrous repair in tissues like tendons, joints, or damaged ligaments 10. The most common irritating agents used are hyaluronic acid, hypertonic dextrose, zinc, growth hormone, and autologous cells such as platelet-rich plasma11. PT has won field in recent years as treatment elected by patients, physicians and researchers. In figure 1 most common words used in PubMed publication about PT are represented. PT has demonstrated beneficial effects in function, pain relief, and quality of life in patients with osteoarthritis, plantar fasciitis and adhesive capsulitis; with high treatment adherence and patient satisfaction 12,13. Bertrand et al. demonstrated prolotherapy efficacy vs placebo in Painful Rotator Cuff Tendinopathy treatment with pain improvement and a higher patient satisfaction.14

Figure 1.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
Figure 1.

Word Map of Prolotherapy research in PubMed. The size of the words represent the frequency that this words have been used in PL research.

An ultrasonography (US) approach has recently been added to the management of interventional shoulder pain. Therapy guided by ultrasonography (US) is an economic and fast tool to improve previously needle blinded procedures. It has the advantage of being less traumatic to tissues, because it allows puncture to the exact site of infiltration, making this therapy more accurate 15,12. PT has not been studied previously in should pain syndrome.

Both techniques have been widely used in pain control with local anesthetic infiltration, but the superiority for pain relief in these patients has not been compared. The aim of this study is to compare the efficacy of prolotherapy versus local anesthetic infiltration for pain relief guided by ultrasonography in patients with chronic shoulder pain.

2. Materials and methods

2.1 Study Design

Retrospective and comparative study of 77 patients recorded from the National Institute of Oncology in México City with diagnosis of CSP who received US guided interventional pain management between January 2017 and December 2019. Demographic data were collected from medical records and captured in a database.

2.2 Studied Population

Inclusion criteria were >18 years and CSP secondary to capsulitis, rotator cuff syndrome, or impingement syndrome. Exclusion criteria were incomplete medical records, patients with a primary tumor in the shoulder, combined technique, or history of previously infiltration. Other pathologies were excluded because low frequency (n=<2) with low statistical representation. The studied population was divided into patients who received nervous infiltration with local anesthetic, and those who were treated with prolotherapy. Mild efficacy of treatment was considered as relief of less than 30% of basal AVS score previous the intervention, moderate efficacy a reduction of 30-50% and, strong efficacy a decrease of >50% from basal AVS score. The present study has been carried out under the Helsinki principles with number of approbation INCAN 2019/0140 by the local bioethics committee.

2.3 Statistical analysis

Statistical analysis was performed under IBM®, SPSS® software Version 25, WordMap was created in RStudio V 2.3.1 for MacOs Catalina Version 10.15.5 with Bibliometrix package 16,17,18. Data distribution was calculated with Shapiro-Wilk test. Data is represented with median and standard deviations (SD). Median differences were determined by T student test; for categorical data X2 test and Fisher Exact Test were used as required. Statistical significance was considered with a p-value <0.05.

3. Results

3.1 Demographic patient characteristics

77 patients received pain treatment guided by US between January 2017 and December 2019. 57 patients were selected according to inclusion and exclusion criteria. 39 were assigned to the local anesthetic with corticosteroids group (CS) and 17 patients to the prolotherapy group (PT). Demographic features are represented in table 1. There were no differences in age, PT group was 60 (±12.4) vs 60 (±14.06) in LA (p>0.05), 78% of PT patients were women vs 82% in LA but there was not statistical significance. 51% of the patients in both groups were unemployed when the first session of treatment was received. Prolotherapy treatment was more used when the left shoulder was affected. CS therapy was also used more when rotator cuff was affected (90% vs 83%, p<0.0.001). Tumors in the stomach and kidneys were more frequent when prolotherapy was used. 84% of patients in both groups needed treatment with three different families of analgesics before US-guided pain treatment without differences between groups. There was no difference in basal severity of pain between the groups.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
  • Download powerpoint
Table I

3.2 Effectiveness in pain control

Pain control was categorized as mild, moderate, or strong. First, we wanted to know if patient choice of the therapy was associated to basal pain severity, but we did not find any difference (fig 2). We then evaluated if pain control was dependent on the initial pain, table 2. PT demonstrated to be equal effective as CS to control pain, no matter the basal pain severity. Both groups had good results decreasing chronic pain in patients; 0% in both groups reported mild or no control of pain, 30% in CS had mild control vs 47% in PT group, and respectively 27% vs 56% reported strong control, without statistical difference between the groups (p=0.16). (Fig 3).

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
  • Download powerpoint
TabLE II
Figure 2.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
Figure 2.

Pain decrease by US guided procedure

Figure 3.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
Figure 3.

Pain decrease based on initial severity.

CS infiltration was more used in the treatment of rotator cuff syndrome (RCS) than prolotherapy. We evaluated if there is a difference in pain decrease based on the primary diagnosis of CSP. 35 patients in the CS group have RCS vs 15 in the PT group. PT group was equally effective as CS in pain control, with respectively 34% of patients with moderate control vs 45%, and 66% vs 55% with strong relief of pain (p<0.21). This control was not dependent of the number of different analgesics required after infiltration procedures, none of the groups needed 3 families of analgesics. 83% of CS group needed 2 classes of analgesics, vs 57% PL. In the population with strong control, 56% and 50% required 2 classes of analgesics, respectively. None of the participants in this study presented adverse events.

3. Discussion

To our knowledge, this is the first study to evaluate the efficacy of CS vs PT for shoulder pain management. PT has demonstrated to be safe and effective in chronic pain therapy in many musculoskeletal pathologies, but just a few studies have investigated PT in CSP, even though it is the third most common musculoskeletal disorder in general practice6. As in other studies reported previously, in this age group the main cause of CSP was Rotator Cuff Syndrome, with a frequency of 88% in the population of this study. This indicates that even though oncologic patients have an increased risk of CSP, the main cause is still Rotator Cuff Syndrome.15,6There is no clear indication of prolotherapy for pain treatment in shoulder pathologies, but in this study, we have demonstrated that it is equally effective as CS injections for treatment of Capsulitis, Rotator Cuff Syndrome and adhesive capsulitis. Further studies are needed to evaluate each of the procedures separately in CSP.

Interestingly, almost 50% of patients in both groups were unemployed when they received local therapy. This agrees with other studies about the potential functional restriction that CSP leads to in patients, and the importance of a therapy that improves these functional restrictions. 19Ultrasound guided pain management has been studied widely. This is a useful equipment for shoulder pain management 15. Raeissadat et al. demonstrated in a prospective study that CS and PT in patients with plantar fasciitis has the same efficacy in pain relief after a 24-weeks follow up. 12 In this study, we have also demonstrated that the use of PT has the same efficacy as LA infiltration for chronic shoulder pain. We also found that pain relief does not depend on basal pain severity. The mechanism of PT effectiveness is based on the induction of anti-inflammatory reactions by irritant agents that enhance tissue healing. 11

We are aware of the limitations of this study, as a retrospective study where we lack control of some variables of interest. However, to our knowledge this is the first study to evaluate the efficacy of PT vs CS for CSP. CS therapy requires multiples sessions, in this study PT and LA infiltration demonstrated to be safe when guided by US.

CS and PT therapies have limitations in shoulder pain treatment. In randomized controlled trial, Kesikburun et al demonstrate that PT is not a therapy that should be used alone, its effectiveness is dependent of physical rehabilitation 20. In this study, we have evaluated the use of PT and LA nervous infiltration separately. This study allows us to place PT as a safe technique when it is guided by US and enables future blinded studies in shoulder pain. PT is a promising technique, and it has demonstrated that its benefits are not limited to pain control, but also improvement of functionality and mobility.

Conclusions

Most patients with CSP needs to receive pharmacologic treatment before receiving an interventional management. LA and PT have demonstrated to relieve pain in short term in these patients, regardless of the severity of basal pain. Prolotherapy is a safe and minimally invasive technique with high adhesion to treatment for pain control in CSP patients. It has the same effectiveness in pain relive as CS nervous injection in oncologic patients, no matter the basal severity of pain. Further prospective, blinded and randomized studies with covariates as functional improvement are needed to prove PT long term benefits, but this study demonstrate that it is a promising treatment.

WHAT IS KNOWN

  • Patients with painful man syndrome need multiple therapies to have pain relief

  • Use of corticosteroid infiltration is therapy with few acute adverse events when performed by ultrasound.

WHAT IS NEW

  • Prolotherapy is as effective as corticosteroid infiltration in pain relief of patients with painful shoulder syndrome.

  • When ultrasound guided prolotherapy is a safe therapy for handling painful shoulde syndrome.

Data Availability

The datasets generated during and/or analysed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request

Conflicts of interest

The authors certify that there is no conflict of interest with any financial organization regarding the material discussed in the manuscript.

Funding

The authors report no involvement in the research by the sponsor that could have influenced the outcome of this work.

Author Contributions

ER-R, Data collection and curation; JAL-L and GO-G, Formal analysis; JAL- and LH-A, Investigation; ER-R and AJ-L Methodology; JAL-L, COG-G, ER-R, Project administration; JAL-L, Software; GO-G and ER-R, Supervision; JAL-L, GO-G, LH-A, AJ-L ER-R, Validation; JAL-L and LH-A, Visualization; JAL-L and ER-R, Writing—original draft preparation; GO-G, LH-A – review & editing. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

…

REFERENCES

  1. 1.↵
    Luime JJ, Koes BW, Hendriksen IJM, et al. 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
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  2. 2.
    Gane EM, Michaleff ZA, Cottrell MA, et al. Prevalence, incidence, and risk factors for shoulder and neck dysfunction after neck dissection: A systematic review. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2017;43(7):1199–1218. doi:10.1016/j.ejso.2016.10.026
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  3. 3.
    Yang S, Park DH, Ahn SH, et al. Prevalence and risk factors of adhesive capsulitis of the shoulder after breast cancer treatment. Support Care Cancer. 2017;25(4):1317–1322. doi:10.1007/s00520-016-3532-4
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  4. 4.↵
    Boudreault J, Desmeules F, Roy JS, Dionne C, Frémont P, MacDermid JC. The efficacy of oral non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs for rotator cuff tendinopathy: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Rehabil Med. 2014;46(4):294–306. doi:10.2340/16501977-1800
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  5. 5.↵
    Mehta S, Gimbel JA, Soslowsky LJ. Etiologic and pathogenetic factors for rotator cuff tendinopathy. Clin Sports Med. 2003;22(4):791–812. doi:10.1016/S0278-5919(03)00012-7
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  6. 6.↵
    Linsell L, Dawson J, Zondervan K, et al. Prevalence and incidence of adults consulting for shoulder conditions in UK primary care; patterns of diagnosis and referral. Rheumatology. 2006;45(2):215–221. doi:10.1093/rheumatology/kei139
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  7. 7.
    Cook T, Lowe CM, Maybury M, Lewis JS. Are corticosteroid injections more beneficial than anaesthetic injections alone in the management of rotator cuffrelated shoulder pain? A systematic review. Br J Sports Med. 2018;52(8):497–504. doi:10.1136/bjsports-2016-097444
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  8. 8.
    Mohamadi A, Chan JJ, Claessen FMAP, Ring D, Chen NC. Corticosteroid Injections Give Small and Transient Pain Relief in Rotator Cuff Tendinosis: A Meta-analysis. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2017;475(1):232–243. doi:10.1007/s11999-016-5002-1
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  9. 9.
    Dean BJF, Franklin SL, Murphy RJ, Javaid MK, Carr AJ. Glucocorticoids induce specific ion-channel-mediated toxicity in human rotator cuff tendon: A mechanism underpinning the ultimately deleterious effect of steroid injection in tendinopathy? Br J Sports Med. 2014;48(22):1620–1626. doi:10.1136/bjsports-2013-093178
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  10. 10.↵
    Rahimzadeh P, Imani F, Faiz SHR, Entezary SR, Zamanabadi MN, Alebouyeh MR. The effects of injecting intra-articular platelet-rich plasma or prolotherapy on pain score and function in knee osteoarthritis. Clin Interv Aging. 2018;13:73–79. doi:10.2147/CIA.S147757
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  11. 11.↵
    Ryu K, Ko D, Lim G, Kim E, Lee SH. Ultrasound-Guided Prolotherapy with Polydeoxyribonucleotide for Painful Rotator Cuff Tendinopathy. Pain Res Manag. 2018;2018. doi:10.1155/2018/8286190
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  12. 12.↵
    Raeissadat SA, Nouri F, Darvish M, Esmaily H, Ghazihosseini P. Ultrasoundguided injection of high molecular weight hyaluronic acid versus corticosteroid in management of plantar fasciitis: A 24-week randomized clinical trial. J Pain Res. 2020;13:109–121. doi:10.2147/JPR.S217419
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  13. 13.↵
    Sit RWS, Wu RWK, Rabago D, et al. Efficacy of intra-articular hypertonic dextrose (Prolotherapy) for knee osteoarthritis: A randomized controlled trial. Ann Fam Med. 2020;18(3):235–242. doi:10.1370/afm.2520
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  14. 14.↵
    Bertrand H, Reeves KD, Bennett CJ, Bicknell S, Cheng AL. Dextrose prolotherapy versus control injections in painful rotator cuff tendinopathy. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2016;97(1):17–25. doi:10.1016/j.apmr.2015.08.412
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  15. 15.↵
    Karel YHJM, Miranda A, Thoomes-de Graaf M, et al. Does the outcome of diagnostic ultrasound influence the treatment modalities and recovery in patients with shoulder pain in physiotherapy practice? Results from a prospective cohort study. Musculoskelet Sci Pract. 2019;41(March 2018):28–35. doi:10.1016/j.msksp.2019.03.003
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  16. 16.↵
    RStudio Team. RStudio: Integrated Development Environment for R. Published online 2015.
  17. 17.↵
    Miscellaneous TH, Yes L. Package ‘Hmisc.’ Published online 2020.
  18. 18.↵
    Villanueva RAM, Chen ZJ, Wickham H. Ggplot2: Elegant Graphics for Data Analysis Using the Grammar of Graphics. Springer-Verlag New York; 2016. doi:10.1080/15366367.2019.1565254
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  19. 19.↵
    Silvestri J. Effects of chronic shoulder pain on quality of life and occupational engagement in the population with chronic spinal cord injury: preparing for the best outcomes with occupational therapy. Disabil Rehabil. 2017;39(1):82–90. doi:10.3109/09638288.2016.1140829
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  20. 20.↵
    Kesikburun S, Tan AK, Yilmaz B, Yaşar E, Yazicio□lu K. Platelet-rich plasma injections in the treatment of chronic rotator cuff tendinopathy: A randomized controlled trial with 1-year follow-up. Am J Sports Med. 2013;41(11):2609–2615. doi:10.1177/0363546513496542
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
Back to top
PreviousNext
Posted December 24, 2020.
Download PDF
Data/Code
Email

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word about medRxiv.

NOTE: Your email address is requested solely to identify you as the sender of this article.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Effectiveness of prolotherapy vs local anesthetic infiltration guided by ultrasound in the treatment of shoulder pain syndrome
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from medRxiv
(Your Name) thought you would like to see this page from the medRxiv website.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Share
Effectiveness of prolotherapy vs local anesthetic infiltration guided by ultrasound in the treatment of shoulder pain syndrome
Juan A. Lira-Lucio, Guillermo Ochoa-Gaítan, Lizeth Hernández-Escobar, Christian I. Padilla-Rivera, Berenice C. Hernández Porras, Ángel M. Juarez-Lemus, Jose Guillermo Ochoa-Millan, Roberto J. Jimenez-Contreras, Enrique Roldán-Rodríguez
medRxiv 2020.12.22.20248223; doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.12.22.20248223
Reddit logo Twitter logo Facebook logo LinkedIn logo Mendeley logo
Citation Tools
Effectiveness of prolotherapy vs local anesthetic infiltration guided by ultrasound in the treatment of shoulder pain syndrome
Juan A. Lira-Lucio, Guillermo Ochoa-Gaítan, Lizeth Hernández-Escobar, Christian I. Padilla-Rivera, Berenice C. Hernández Porras, Ángel M. Juarez-Lemus, Jose Guillermo Ochoa-Millan, Roberto J. Jimenez-Contreras, Enrique Roldán-Rodríguez
medRxiv 2020.12.22.20248223; doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.12.22.20248223

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Subject Area

  • Anesthesia
Subject Areas
All Articles
  • Addiction Medicine (269)
  • Allergy and Immunology (549)
  • Anesthesia (134)
  • Cardiovascular Medicine (1747)
  • Dentistry and Oral Medicine (238)
  • Dermatology (172)
  • Emergency Medicine (310)
  • Endocrinology (including Diabetes Mellitus and Metabolic Disease) (653)
  • Epidemiology (10780)
  • Forensic Medicine (8)
  • Gastroenterology (584)
  • Genetic and Genomic Medicine (2933)
  • Geriatric Medicine (286)
  • Health Economics (531)
  • Health Informatics (1918)
  • Health Policy (833)
  • Health Systems and Quality Improvement (743)
  • Hematology (290)
  • HIV/AIDS (627)
  • Infectious Diseases (except HIV/AIDS) (12496)
  • Intensive Care and Critical Care Medicine (684)
  • Medical Education (299)
  • Medical Ethics (86)
  • Nephrology (321)
  • Neurology (2780)
  • Nursing (150)
  • Nutrition (431)
  • Obstetrics and Gynecology (554)
  • Occupational and Environmental Health (597)
  • Oncology (1454)
  • Ophthalmology (440)
  • Orthopedics (172)
  • Otolaryngology (255)
  • Pain Medicine (190)
  • Palliative Medicine (56)
  • Pathology (379)
  • Pediatrics (865)
  • Pharmacology and Therapeutics (362)
  • Primary Care Research (333)
  • Psychiatry and Clinical Psychology (2630)
  • Public and Global Health (5338)
  • Radiology and Imaging (1002)
  • Rehabilitation Medicine and Physical Therapy (594)
  • Respiratory Medicine (722)
  • Rheumatology (329)
  • Sexual and Reproductive Health (288)
  • Sports Medicine (278)
  • Surgery (327)
  • Toxicology (47)
  • Transplantation (149)
  • Urology (125)