A study to evaluate the effect of ultrasound treatment on nodules in multiple sclerosis patients

References

• Costello K. Multiple sclerosis research: diagnostics, disease-modifying treatments, and emerging therapies. J Neurosci Nurs 2013; 45(6 Suppl 1):S14–23.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Frohman EM, Racke MK, Raine CS. Multiple sclerosis–the plaque and its pathogenesis. N Engl J Med 2006; 354(9):942–55.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kremenchutzky M, Cottrell D, Rice Get al., The natural history of multiple sclerosis: a geographically based study. 7. Progressive-relapsing and relapsing-progressive multiple sclerosis: a re-evaluation. Brain 1999; 122(Pt 10):1941–50.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lublin FD, Reingold SC. Defining the clinical course of multiple sclerosis: results of an international survey. National Multiple Sclerosis Society (USA) Advisory Committee on Clinical Trials of New Agents in Multiple Sclerosis. Neurology 1996; 46(4):907–11.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Langer-Gould A, Moses HH, Murray TJ. Strategies for managing the side effects of treatments for multiple sclerosis. Neurology 2004; 63(11 Suppl 5):S35–41.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Buttmann M, Goebeler M, Toksoy Aet al., Subcutaneous interferon-beta injections in patients with multiple sclerosis initiate inflammatory skin reactions by local chemokine induction. J Neuroimmunol 2005; 168(1–2):175–82.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Balak DM, Hengstman GJ, Cakmak A, Thio HB. Cutaneous adverse events associated with disease-modifying treatment in multiple sclerosis: a systematic review. Mult Scler 2012; 18(12):1705–17.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Frohman EM, Brannon K, Alexander Set al., Disease-modifying agent related skin reactions in multiple sclerosis: prevention, assessment, and management. Mult Scler 2004; 10(3):302–7.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Balak DM, Hengstman GJ, Hajdarbegovic Eet al., Prevalence of cutaneous adverse events associated with long-term disease-modifying therapy and their impact on health-related quality of life in patients with multiple sclerosis: a cross-sectional study. BMC Neurol 2013; 13:146. Available at: http://bmcneurol.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1471-2377-13-146
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Robertson VJ. Dosage and treatment response in randomized clinical trials of therapeutic ultrasound. Phys Therapy Sport 2002; 3(3):124–33.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Plaja, J. Ultrasonido, vibración y onda de choque. In: Analgesia por medios físicos. Barcelona: McGraw-Hill Interamericana de España; 2002.
   Google Scholar
• Plaja J. Manual de ultrasonoterapia. Barcelona: Masson; 1998.
   Google Scholar
• Cakir S, Hepguler S, Ozturk Cet al., Efficacy of therapeutic ultrasound for the management of knee osteoarthritis: a randomized, controlled, and double-blind study. Am J Phys Med Rehabil 2014; 93(5):405–12.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tascioglu F, Kuzgun S, Armagan O, Ogutler G. Short-term effectiveness of ultrasound therapy in knee osteoarthritis. J Int Med Res 2010; 38(4):1233–42.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Allen RJ. Physical agents used in the management of chronic pain by physical therapists. Phys Med Rehabil Clin N Am 2006; 17(2):315–45.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• National Cancer Registry Programme. Biological effects of ultrasound: mechanism and clinical implications. Bethesda MD: National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements; 1983. Available at: http://www.ncrppublications.org/Reports/074
   Google Scholar
• CENETEC SALUD. Guía tecnológica No. 33. Ultrasonido terapéutico (GMDN 11248). Secretaría de Salud, Subsecretaría de Innovación y Calidad, Centro Nacional de Excelencia Tecnológica en Salud, editors. Mexico: Centro Nacional de Excelencia Tecnológica en Salud; 2006. Available at: http://www.cenetec.salud.gob.mx/descargas/biomedica/guias_tecnologicas/33gt_ultrasonido_rehabilitacion.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Ozgonenel L, Aytekin E, Durmusoglu G. A double-blind trial of clinical effects of therapeutic ultrasound in knee osteoarthritis. Ultrasound Med Biol 2009; 35(1):44–9.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Beer K, Muller M, Hew-Winzeler AMet al., The prevalence of injection-site reactions with disease-modifying therapies and their effect on adherence in patients with multiple sclerosis: an observational study. BMC Neurol 2011; 11:144. Available at: http://bmcneurol.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1471-2377-11-144
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nakamura Y, Kawachi Y, Furuta Jet al., Severe local skin reactions to interferon beta-1b in multiple sclerosis-improvement by deep subcutaneous injection. Eur J Dermatol 2008; 18(5):579–82.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lebrun C, Mondot L, Bertagna Met al., Endermology: a treatment for injection-induced lipoatrophy in multiple sclerosis patients treated with subcutaneous glatiramer acetate. Clin Neurol Neurosurg 2011; 113(9):721–4.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Marquez-Rebollo C, Vergara-Carrasco L, Diaz-Navarro Ret al., Benefit of endermology on indurations and panniculitis/lipoatrophy during relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis long-term treatment with glatiramer acetate. Adv Ther 2014; 31(8):904–14.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wolinsky JS, Borresen TE, Dietrich DWet al., GLACIER: an open-label, randomized, multicenter study to assess the safety and tolerability of glatiramer acetate 40 mg three-times weekly versus 20 mg daily in patients with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis. Mult Scler Relat Disord 2015; 4(4):370–6.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Caporro M, Disanto G, Gobbi Cet al., Two decades of subcutaneous glatiramer acetate injection: current role of the standard dose, and new high-dose low-frequency glatiramer acetate in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis treatment. Patient Prefer Adherence 2014; 8:1123–34.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ebadi S, Ansari NN, Henschke Net al., The effect of continuous ultrasound on chronic low back pain: protocol of a randomized controlled trial. BMC Musculoskelet Disord 2011; 12:59. Available at: http://bmcmusculoskeletdisord.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1471-2474-12-59
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fiore P, Panza F, Cassatella Get al., Short-term effects of high-intensity laser therapy versus ultrasound therapy in the treatment of low back pain: a randomized controlled trial. Eur J Phys Rehabil Med 2011; 47(3):367–73.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Masson IF, de Oliveira BD, Machado AFet al., Manual lymphatic drainage and therapeutic ultrasound in liposuction and lipoabdominoplasty post-operative period. Indian J Plast Surg 2014; 47(1):70–6.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Ulus Y, Tander B, Akyol Yet al., Therapeutic ultrasound versus sham ultrasound for the management of patients with knee osteoarthritis: a randomized double-blind controlled clinical study. Int J Rheum Dis 2012; 15(2):197–206.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar