You are currently viewing a new version of our website. To view the old version click .
MDPIMDPI
Search all articles
Life
Download PDF
  • Editorial
  • Open Access

13 December 2025

Recent Advances in Shockwave Therapy for Musculoskeletal and Soft-Tissue Disorders

,
,
,
,
and
1
Department of Translational Research and New Technologies Medicine and Surgery, University of Pisa, Via Roma 55, 56126 Pisa, Italy
2
Shock Waves Center, Ortho-Rehabilitation Department IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, 20048 Rozzano (MI), Italy
3
Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation Unit, Sant’Andrea Hospital, Sapienza University of Rome, 00189 Rome, Italy
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Life2025, 15(12), 1912;https://doi.org/10.3390/life15121912
This article belongs to the Special Issue Recent Advances in Shockwave Therapy for Musculoskeletal and Soft-Tissue Disorders
Version Notes
Order Reprints
Extracorporeal shockwave therapy (ESWT) represents a form of “mechanotherapy” that operates by delivering acoustic waves to biological tissues. From a biophysical standpoint, shockwaves exert mechanical forces that stimulate a cascade of biological signaling events, ultimately promoting tissue regeneration and healing through “mechano-transduction” [1,2,3,4]. Originally employed in the 1980s for its disintegrative effects on urinary stones (lithotripsy), shockwave technology has since undergone remarkable development, with clinical applications across a wide spectrum of medical specialties, particularly in the management of musculoskeletal and soft-tissue disorders. Pioneering studies in the early 1990s demonstrated the successful use of shockwave therapy for nonunion long-bone fractures, plantar fasciitis, lateral epicondylitis (tennis elbow), and calcific rotator cuff tendinitis. Since then, ESWT has garnered increasing attention as a growing body of research has revealed its potential to yield a variety of beneficial therapeutic effects on the locomotor system, extending way beyond purely mechanical, disintegrative impacts. Nowadays, ESWT is considered a non-invasive, well-tolerated, and safe therapeutic option in orthopedics, offering promising outcomes in pain relief, tissue healing, and functional recovery [5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12]. Current evidence supports a complex interplay of ESWT-induced mechanisms, including enhanced tissue perfusion and neoangiogenesis, immunomodulatory effects, fibroblast stimulation, stem cell activity regulation, and analgesia [13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20]. At the same time, emerging findings show that ESWT can induce the release of extracellular vesicles (EVs), especially exosomes, representing a major breakthrough in EV-based regenerative medicine [21,22,23,24]. This mechanism holds significant promise for the treatment of various musculoskeletal injuries and may ultimately position ESWT as a cutting-edge, non-invasive treatment modality for modulating cell-to-cell communication and enhancing tissue regeneration.
While significant advances have been made in the clinical application of ESWT, the precise cellular and molecular mechanisms underlying the therapeutic effects of shockwaves remain subjects of intense ongoing research. At the same time, the development of different types of shockwave generators further complicates this issue, as each type of shockwave device (i.e., electrohydraulic, piezoelectric, and ballistic) features a different energy signature and bioeffects, potentially leading to variations in treatment outcomes. Furthermore, methodological inconsistencies in treatment protocols across studies (e.g., shockwave device, number of sessions, day intervals between sessions, number of impulses, and energy levels) add another layer of complexity, making it difficult to establish a universally accepted “gold standard” for treatments. This, in turn, represents a compelling opportunity for future research, as identifying optimal treatment parameters could significantly enhance patient outcomes and further advance the clinical effectiveness of ESWT.
This Special Issue aimed to collect experimental and clinical evidence highlighting the latest advances in the application of ESWT to treat musculoskeletal and soft-tissue disorders, combining original research with review articles addressing the key aspects of this emerging field.
Yoon et al. [25] conducted an open-label, randomized, controlled trial to evaluate whether focused ESWT is a safe adjunctive therapy to promote healing in elderly patients with iatrogenic abductor muscle injury following intramedullary nailing for hip fractures. While the functional improvements were not statistically significant, early postoperative ESWT was shown to accelerate pain reduction, which may accelerate mobilization and rehabilitation. From a clinical standpoint, this study suggests that ESWT could serve as a non-pharmacological, safe pain relief modality that enhances recovery after hip fracture in geriatric patients. This, in turn, aligns with modern perioperative care to minimize opioid use and facilitate early mobilization.
In a prospective randomized clinical trial, Covelli et al. [26] evaluated the clinical and functional outcomes of focused ESWT compared to therapeutic exercise over 6 months in 72 patients with rhizarthrosis (i.e., osteoarthritis of the trapeziometacarpal joint of the hand). While both approaches were effective in managing these patients, ESWT provided more sustained clinical benefits, with more persistent improvements at the 6-month follow-up. These findings represent a significant advancement in the management of rhizarthrosis, as to date, only one previous clinical study has explored the use of ESWT for this condition [27]. In particular, this study demonstrated that ESWT has superior effects over hyaluronic acid infiltration in terms of pain reduction, which is consistent with the analgesic and anti-inflammatory effects of ESWT.
Santilli et al. [28] developed an artificial neural network (ANN) model to identify predictive factors influencing the clinical success of focused ESWT for chronic non-calcific supraspinatus tendinopathy. In particular, the study analyzed demographic and clinical variables, including age, gender, VAS, and Constant–Murley, Roles, and Maudsley scores, to predict minimal clinically successful therapy (MCST), defined as a ≥40% reduction in VAS, six months after ESWT. The ANN model demonstrated good predictive ability and discrimination, with a sensitivity of 80.7% and an area under the ROC curve of 0.701. Using the ANN, the authors demonstrated a more effective response to ESWT when the main predictive factors, expressed through clinical and functional scales, were better and the patients were male or younger. Furthermore, age before ESWT emerged as the most influential factor for achieving clinical success, which is in line with the existing literature showing greater ESWT responsiveness in younger individuals [29,30]. Conversely, patients who were older, female, or presented with poor initial clinical scores were less likely to achieve MCST, suggesting that the use of combined therapies would be more appropriate. Therefore, the study emphasized that patients’ characteristics and clinical scales should not only be considered as evaluation tools to verify improvements but also as prognostic factors that could be integrated in an ANN-based predictive model to facilitate decision-making for ESWT application.
Müller-Ehrenberg et al. [31] reviewed the mechanisms, applications, and effectiveness of ESWT in the management of myofascial pain syndrome (MPS). While the review highlights the moderate to good clinical efficacy of ESWT, it also reveals substantial methodological inconsistencies across the existing literature that limit definitive conclusions. Key shortcomings include inconsistent diagnostic criteria for MPS, wide variability in shockwave application parameters, markedly short and heterogeneous follow-up periods, and frequent nonadherence to the International Society for Medical Shockwave Treatment (ISMST) guidelines. Furthermore, another critical concern that emerged from the study is the frequent conflation of radial pressure wave (RPW) therapy with focused extracorporeal shockwave therapy (fESWT), despite their fundamental differences in generation devices, physical characteristics, and mechanisms of action. In light of these considerations, the authors call for future higher-quality, rigorously designed studies that employ standardized protocols to generate robust scientific evidence and advance ESWT as a reliable non-invasive treatment modality for MPS.
Lastly, this Special Issue also features an author response written by Covelli et al. [32], which further clarifies methodological concerns raised in a previous publication, thus contributing to the evolving dialog surrounding ESWT research.
In conclusion, this Special Issue perfectly reflects the dynamic and evolving landscape of ESWT while emphasizing the need for continued investigation to address the remaining questions surrounding its mechanisms of action. At the same time, it also highlights the need for further research to expand the clinical evidence, which will undoubtedly help refine treatment protocols and uncover new medical fields for shockwave application to treat both common and complex conditions.

Author Contributions

Writing—original draft preparation, L.R. and F.F.; writing—review and editing, M.V., M.C.V., M.C.D. and M.G. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. Frairia, R.; Berta, L. Biological effects of extracorporeal shock waves on fibroblasts. A review. Muscles Ligaments Tendons J. 2012, 1, 138–147. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  2. Notarnicola, A.; Moretti, B. The biological effects of extracorporeal shock wave therapy (eswt) on tendon tissue. Muscles Ligaments Tendons J. 2012, 2, 33–37. [Google Scholar]
  3. d’Agostino, M.C.; Craig, K.; Tibalt, E.; Respizzi, S. Shock wave as biological therapeutic tool: From mechanical stimulation to recovery and healing, through mechanotransduction. Int. J. Surg. 2015, 24, 147–153. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  4. Simplicio, C.L.; Purita, J.; Murrell, W.; Santos, G.S.; Dos Santos, R.G.; Lana, J.F.S.D. Extracorporeal shock wave therapy mechanisms in musculoskeletal regenerative medicine. J. Clin. Orthop. Trauma 2020, 11, S309–S318. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  5. Moya, D.; Ramón, S.; Schaden, W.; Wang, C.J.; Guiloff, L.; Cheng, J.H. The role of extracorporeal shockwave treatment in musculoskeletal disorders. J. Bone Jt. Surg. Am. 2018, 100, 251–263. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Ryskalin, L.; Morucci, G.; Natale, G.; Soldani, P.; Gesi, M. Molecular Mechanisms Underlying the Pain-Relieving Effects of Extracorporeal Shock Wave Therapy: A Focus on Fascia Nociceptors. Life 2022, 12, 743. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  7. Ramon, S.; Russo, S.; Santoboni, F.; Lucenteforte, G.; Di Luise, C.; de Unzurrunzaga, R.; Vetrano, M.; Albano, M.; Baldini, R.; Cugat, R.; et al. Focused shockwave treatment for greater trochanteric pain syndrome: A multicenter, randomized, controlled clinical trial. J. Bone Jt. Surg. Am. 2020, 102, 1305–1311. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  8. Martini, D.; Sconza, C.; Di Matteo, B.; Superchi, F.; Leonardi, G.; Kon, E.; Respizzi, S.; Morenghi, E.; D’Agostino, M.C. Early application of extracorporeal shock wave therapy improves pain control and functional scores in patients undergoing total knee arthroplasty: A randomized controlled trial. Int. Orthop. 2023, 47, 2757–2765. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  9. Liu, K.; Zhang, Q.; Chen, L.; Zhang, H.; Xu, X.; Yuan, Z.; Dong, J. Efficacy and safety of extracorporeal shockwave therapy in chronic low back pain: A systematic review and meta-analysis of 632 patients. J. Orthop. Surg. Res. 2023, 18, 455. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Santilli, G.; Ciccarelli, A.; Martino, M.; Pacini, P.; Agostini, F.; Bernetti, A.; Giuliani, L.; Del Gaudio, G.; Mangone, M.; Colonna, V.; et al. Pain, function, and elastosonographic assessment after shockwave therapy in non-calcific supraspinatus tendinopathy: A retrospective observational study. J. Funct. Morphol. Kinesiol. 2025, 10, 39. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  11. Fulceri, F.; Ryskalin, L.; Morucci, G.; Busoni, F.; Soldani, P.; Gesi, M. Long-Term Efficacy of Combined Focused and Radial Extracorporeal Shockwave Therapy for Gluteus Medius Tendon Pathology: A Pilot Study. Life 2024, 14, 1698. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  12. Xue, X.; Song, Q.; Yang, X.; Kuati, A.; Fu, H.; Liu, Y.; Cui, G. Effect of extracorporeal shockwave therapy for rotator cuff tendinopathy: A systematic review and meta-analysis. BMC Musculoskelet. Disord. 2024, 25, 357. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  13. Sukubo, N.G.; Tibalt, E.; Respizzi, S.; Locati, M.; Agostino, M.C. Effect of shock waves on macrophages: A possible role in tissue regeneration and remodeling. Int. J. Surg. 2025, 24, 124–130. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  14. Leone, L.; Raffa, S.; Vetrano, M.; Ranieri, D.; Malisan, F.; Scrofani, C.; Vulpiani, M.C.; Ferretti, A.; Torrisi, M.R.; Visco, V. Extracorporeal Shock Wave Treatment (ESWT) enhances the in vitro-induced differentiation of human tendon-derived stem/progenitor cells (hTSPCs). Oncotarget 2016, 7, 6410–6423. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  15. D’Agostino, M.C.; Frairia, R.; Romeo, P.; Amelio, E.; Berta, L.; Bosco, V.; Gigliotti, S.; Guerra, C.; Messina, S.; Messuri, L.; et al. Extracorporeal shockwaves as regenerative therapy in orthopedic traumatology: A narrative review from basic research to clinical practice. J. Biol. Regul. Homeost. Agents 2016, 30, 323–332. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  16. Wang, M.; Yang, D.; Hu, Z.; Shi, Y.; Ma, Y.; Cao, X.; Guo, T.; Cai, H.; Cai, H. Extracorporeal cardiac shock waves therapy improves the function of endothelial progenitor cells after hypoxia injury via activating PI3K/Akt/eNOS signal pathway. Front. Cardiovasc. Med. 2021, 88, 747497. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  17. Tepeköylü, C.; Wang, F.S.; Kozaryn, R.; Albrecht-Schgoer, K.; Theurl, M.; Schaden, W.; Ke, H.J.; Yang, Y.; Kirchmair, R.; Grimm, M.; et al. Shock wave treatment induces angiogenesis and mobilizes endogenous CD31/CD34-positive endothelial cells in a hindlimb ischemia model: Implications for angiogenesis and vasculogenesis. J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg. 2013, 146, 971–978. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Basoli, V.; Chaudary, S.; Cruciani, S.; Santaniello, S.; Balzano, F.; Ventura, C.; Redl, H.; Dungel, P.; Maioli, M. Mechanical Stimulation of Fibroblasts by Extracorporeal Shock Waves: Modulation of Cell Activation and Proliferation through a Transient Proinflammatory Milieu. Cell Transplant. 2020, 29, 0963689720916175. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Ryskalin, L.; Fulceri, F.; Soldani, P.; D’Agostino, M.C.; Morucci, G.; Moscato, S.; Gesi, M. Ultrastructural insights into early myoblast differentiation induced by shockwave stimulation. Front. Physiol. 2025, 16, 1636931. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  20. Zhao, Z.; Wang, Y.; Wang, Q.; Liang, J.; Hu, W.; Zhao, S.; Li, P.; Zhu, H.; Li, Z. Radial extracorporeal shockwave promotes subchondral bone stem/progenitor cell self-renewal by activating YAP/TAZ and facilitates cartilage repair in vivo. Stem Cell Res. Ther. 2021, 12, 19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Pölzl, L.; Nägele, F.; Hirsch, J.; Graber, M.; Grimm, M.; Gollmann-Tepeköylü, C.; Holfeld, J. Exosome Isolation after in vitro Shock Wave Therapy. J. Vis. Exp. 2020, 163, e61508. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  22. Wu, L.; Li, Z.; Song, W.; Zhang, L.; Li, K.; Wang, H. Cardiac shock wave therapy-induced exosome derived from OGD/R-treated H9c2 cells carrying miR-98-5p promotes HUVECs angiogenesis. Sci. Rep. 2025, 15, 15213. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  23. Yang, D.; Wang, M.; Hu, Z.; Ma, Y.; Shi, Y.; Cao, X.; Guo, T.; Cai, H.; Cai, H. Extracorporeal Cardiac Shock Wave-Induced Exosome Derived From Endothelial Colony-Forming Cells Carrying miR-140-3p Alleviate Cardiomyocyte Hypoxia/Reoxygenation Injury via the PTEN/PI3K/AKT Pathway. Front. Cell Dev. Biol. 2022, 9, 779936. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  24. Gollmann-Tepeköylü, C.; Pölzl, L.; Graber, M.; Hirsch, J.; Nägele, F.; Lobenwein, D.; Hess, M.W.; Blumer, M.J.; Kirchmair, E.; Zipperle, J.; et al. miR-19a-3p containing exosomes improve function of ischaemic myocardium upon shock wave therapy. Cardiovasc. Res. 2020, 116, 1226–1236. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  25. Yoon, Y.; Hwang, J.; Lee, J.; Lam, K.H.S.; Castro, J.C.d.; Kim, H.; Sung, D.; Kim, S.; Lee, M.; Park, C. Effect of Early Extracorporeal Shockwave Therapy on Postoperative Pain and Functional Recovery After Intramedullary Nailing: An Open-Label Randomized Controlled Trial. Life 2025, 15, 1704. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Covelli, I.; De Giorgi, S.; Di Lorenzo, A.; Pavone, A.; Salvato, F.; Rifino, F.; Moretti, B.; Solarino, G.; Notarnicola, A. Extracorporeal Shock Wave Therapy (ESWT) vs. Exercise in Thumb Osteoarthritis (SWEX-TO): Prospective Clinical Trial at 6 Months. Life 2024, 14, 1453. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  27. Ioppolo, F.; Saracino, F.; Rizzo, R.S.; Monacelli, G.; Lanni, D.; Di Sante, L.; Cacchio, A.; Santilli, V.; Venditto, T. Comparison Between Extracorporeal Shock Wave Therapy and Intra-articular Hyaluronic Acid Injections in the Treatment of First Carpometacarpal Joint Osteoarthritis. Ann. Rehabil. Med. 2018, 42, 92–100. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  28. Santilli, G.; Vetrano, M.; Mangone, M.; Agostini, F.; Bernetti, A.; Coraci, D.; Paoloni, M.; de Sire, A.; Paolucci, T.; Latini, E.; et al. Predictive Prognostic Factors in Non-Calcific Supraspinatus Tendinopathy Treated with Focused Extracorporeal Shock Wave Therapy: An Artificial Neural Network Approach. Life 2024, 14, 681. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  29. De la Corte-Rodríguez, H.; Román-Belmonte, J.M.; Rodríguez-Damiani, B.A.; Vázquez-Sasot, A.; Rodríguez-Merchán, E.C. Extracorporeal Shock Wave Therapy for the Treatment of Musculoskeletal Pain: A Narrative Review. Healthcare 2023, 11, 2830. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  30. Taylor, J.; Dunkerley, S.; Silver, D.; Redfern, A.; Talbot, N.; Sharpe, I.; Guyver, P. Extracorporeal shockwave therapy (ESWT) for refractory Achilles tendinopathy: A prospective audit with 2-year follow-up. Foot 2016, 26, 23–29. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Müller-Ehrenberg, H.; Bonavita, J.; Sun, Y.; Stecco, C.; Giordani, F. The State of Extracorporeal Shockwave Therapy for Myofascial Pain Syndrome—A Scoping Review and a Call for Standardized Protocols. Life 2025, 15, 1501. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  32. Covelli, I.; De Giorgi, S.; Di Lorenzo, A.; Pavone, A.; Salvato, F.; Rifino, F.; Moretti, B.; Solarino, G.; Notarnicola, A. Reply to Karademir, F.; et al. Comment on “Covelli et al. Extracorporeal Shock Wave Therapy (ESWT) vs. Exercise in Thumb Osteoarthritis (SWEX-TO): Prospective Clinical Trial at 6 Months. Life 2024, 14, 1453”. Life 2025, 15, 385. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Article Metrics

Citations

Article Access Statistics

Journal Statistics
Multiple requests from the same IP address are counted as one view.
Download PDF
Advancing Precision Diagnosis of Sarcopenic Obesity Through Digital Technologies, Wearables and Omics Data
Previous
Male Gender Is a Contributing Risk Factor to Predict Sticky Fat in Laparoscopic Partial Nephrectomy
Next