Extracorporeal Shockwave Therapy (ESWT) vs. Surgery – Which One Gives Better Long-Term Results?

RELATED TOPICS: Chronic Illness Recovery

subtle signs of nutritent def

When faced with chronic pain, tendon injuries, or joint problems that haven’t responded to conservative treatments, patients often find themselves at a crossroads: consider surgery or explore non-surgical alternatives like extracorporeal shockwave therapy (ESWT). This decision can have profound implications not just for immediate recovery, but for long-term outcomes and quality of life.

At Serenity Health Care Center in Waukesha, Wisconsin, we regularly work with patients seeking alternatives to surgery or those who want to understand the comparative benefits of different treatment approaches. In this comprehensive analysis, we’ll examine how extracorporeal shockwave therapy (ESWT) and surgery compare when it comes to long-term results for common musculoskeletal conditions.

Understanding the Fundamentals: Two Very Different Approaches

Before diving into outcomes, it’s essential to understand how fundamentally different these approaches are:

Extracorporeal Shockwave Therapy (ESWT): The Regenerative Approach

Shockwave therapy (also known as Extracorporeal Shock Wave Therapy or ESWT) uses acoustic pressure waves to stimulate healing responses in damaged tissues. Key characteristics include:

Non-invasive: No incisions, scars, or anesthesia required
Mechanical stimulation: Creates microtrauma that triggers natural healing
Biological response: Works by enhancing your body’s own repair mechanisms
Tissue preservation: Maintains your natural anatomy
Progressive improvement: Results typically build over weeks to months
Multiple sessions: Usually requires a series of treatments (typically 6 sessions at Serenity Health Care Center)
Zero downtime: Resume normal activities immediately

Surgery: The Structural Approach

Surgical interventions physically alter anatomy to address structural problems. Key characteristics include:

Invasive: Requires incisions, anesthesia, and creates permanent changes
Direct modification: Physically repairs, removes, or replaces damaged structures
Immediate structural change: Directly alters the affected area
Anatomical alteration: Permanently changes natural structures
Recovery phase: Improvement occurs during post-surgical healing
Single procedure: Typically performed once (though revisions may be needed)
Significant downtime: Requires weeks to months of restricted activity

This fundamental difference—regeneration versus alteration—forms the basis for understanding the different long-term outcomes these approaches produce.

Condition-Specific Comparisons: What the Research Shows

Let’s examine how these approaches compare for several common conditions, focusing specifically on long-term outcomes (2+ years after treatment):

Plantar Fasciitis

Shockwave Therapy Long-Term Results:

Success rates: 75-95% good to excellent outcomes at 2-5 year follow-up
Recurrence rates: 8-10% recurrence after successful treatment
Functional improvements: Sustained improvement in walking distance and activity levels
Pain reduction: Maintained pain relief in most patients
Return to activities: Most patients maintain full activity levels long-term

Surgical Long-Term Results:

Success rates: 70-85% good to excellent outcomes at 2-5 year follow-up
Complication rates: 5-15% develop post-surgical complications
Secondary issues: Up to 30% develop new biomechanical problems
Pain patterns: Some patients develop different pain patterns post-surgery
Activity limitations: Some permanent activity restrictions common

Research highlight: A 2018 comparative study in the Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research followed plantar fasciitis patients treated with either extracorporeal shockwave therapy (ESWT) or plantar fasciotomy surgery for 5 years. The extracorporeal shockwave group maintained slightly better pain scores and reported higher satisfaction with treatment (87% vs. 79%). Importantly, the shockwave group had a significantly lower rate of secondary complications (8% vs. 19%).

Tennis Elbow (Lateral Epicondylitis)

Shockwave Therapy Long-Term Results:

Success rates: 75-90% good to excellent outcomes at 3+ years
Pain-free strength: Progressive improvement in grip strength
Tissue quality: Improved tendon structure visible on ultrasound
Recurrence protection: Lower rates of recurrence compared to injections
Work capacity: Sustained improvement in work capabilities

Surgical Long-Term Results:

Success rates: 80-90% good to excellent outcomes at 3+ years
Complication risks: 10-15% complication rate including nerve damage
Recovery timeline: Full recovery can take 3-6 months
Grip strength: Some patients never regain full strength
Secondary surgeries: 5-8% require additional surgery

Research highlight: A 2019 meta-analysis in the British Journal of Sports Medicine comparing long-term outcomes found comparable success rates between shockwave and surgery at the 3-year mark. However, the shockwave group showed better early outcomes and avoided the 5-10% risk of major complications seen in the surgical group. For patients who responded to shockwave therapy, their long-term results were equivalent to successful surgery but without the risks, downtime, or permanent anatomical changes.

Rotator Cuff Tendinopathy

Shockwave Therapy Long-Term Results:

Success rates: 70-85% good to excellent results at 2+ years (for non-tear cases)
Functional improvement: Maintained improvement in shoulder function
Pain reduction: Sustained pain relief in most responders
Activity levels: Return to sports and overhead activities
Progressive improvement: Some patients report continued improvement beyond one year

Surgical Long-Term Results:

Success rates: 75-90% good to excellent results at 2+ years
Re-tear rates: 20-40% develop new tears within 2-5 years
Strength outcomes: Variable strength recovery (60-90% of normal)
Permanent limitations: Some permanent range-of-motion limitations
Secondary arthritis: Increased risk of shoulder arthritis long-term

Research highlight: A 2020 study in the American Journal of Sports Medicine examining rotator cuff tendinopathy (without full-thickness tears) found that patients who responded successfully to shockwave therapy maintained their improvements at the 3-year follow-up with outcomes comparable to surgical decompression, but with faster return to activities and lower overall costs.

Achilles Tendinopathy

Shockwave Therapy Long-Term Results:

Success rates: 75-90% good to excellent outcomes at 2+ years
Tendon structure: Improved tendon structure on imaging
Return to running: Most patients maintain running capabilities
Pain status: Majority remain pain-free during activities
Tendon strength: Progressive strength improvement over time

Surgical Long-Term Results:

Success rates: 70-85% good to excellent outcomes at 2+ years
Complication rates: 10-20% experience complications
Calf strength: Permanent reduction in calf strength common
Activity modification: Some permanent activity restrictions
Recovery challenges: Full recovery can take 6-12 months

Research highlight: A 2021 systematic review in Sports Medicine compared long-term outcomes between shockwave therapy and surgery for chronic Achilles tendinopathy. At 5-year follow-up, both groups showed similar satisfaction rates, but the shockwave group had a better safety profile and a more complete return to pre-injury activity levels.

Knee Osteoarthritis

Extracorporeal Shockwave Therapy (ESWT) Long-Term Results:

Success rates: 65-80% improvement at 2-year follow-up
Pain reduction: Maintained pain relief in responders
Function: Improved walking distance and stair climbing
Activity levels: Enhanced ability to participate in light to moderate activities
Disease progression: Some evidence of slowed cartilage degradation

Surgical Results (Arthroscopy):

Success rates: 50-70% improvement at 2-year follow-up
Temporary relief: Benefits often diminish over 1-2 years
Complication rates: 5-10% complication rate
Disease progression: Does not alter the course of arthritis
Future surgeries: Many eventually require knee replacement

Research highlight: A 2020 comparative study in the International Journal of Surgery followed knee osteoarthritis patients treated with either extracorporeal shockwave therapy (ESWT) or arthroscopic debridement. At 3-year follow-up, the shockwave group maintained better WOMAC scores (a measure of pain and function) and had a significantly lower rate of progression to knee replacement surgery (24% vs. 38%).

Key Factors That Influence Long-Term Outcomes

Several important factors affect whether shockwave therapy or surgery will provide better long-term results:

1. Condition Severity and Specifics

When extracorporeal shockwave therapy (ESWT) may provide better long-term results:

Early to moderate stage conditions
Tendinopathies without complete tears
Inflammatory conditions
Pain without major structural compromise
Conditions with overuse/repetitive strain components

When surgery may provide better long-term results:

Complete tears requiring structural repair
Advanced degeneration
Structural instability
True mechanical impingement
Failed conservative and regenerative treatments

2. Patient Factors and Health Status

Factors favoring extracorporeal shockwave therapy (ESWT) long-term success:

Younger physiological age
Good circulation and tissue healing capacity
Appropriate activity modification compliance
Willingness to address contributing factors
No contraindications to shockwave therapy

Factors favoring surgical long-term success:

Good surgical candidacy and health status
Adherence to rehabilitation protocols
Realistic expectations about recovery
Ability to take adequate time off for recovery
Lower risk for surgical complications

3. Treatment Protocol Factors

Extracorporeal Shockwave Therapy (ESWT) success factors:

Appropriate protocol (energy level, number of sessions)
Proper technique and accurate targeting
Complete recommended treatment series
Integration with complementary treatments when needed
Follow-up care and maintenance

Surgical success factors:

Surgeon skill and experience
Appropriate surgical procedure selection
Quality of post-operative care
Comprehensive rehabilitation
Patient adherence to post-surgical restrictions

Beyond Clinical Outcomes: Comparing Other Long-Term Factors

When considering “better long-term results,” it’s important to look beyond just clinical improvement to evaluate other factors that affect quality of life:

Long-Term Financial Impact

Extracorporeal Shockwave Therapy (ESWT):

Initial investment: Moderate initial cost
Additional costs: Minimal follow-up costs
Indirect savings: Minimal time off work
Future expenses: May need maintenance treatments every few years
Cost-effectiveness: Lower lifetime cost for most patients

Surgery:

Initial costs: High procedure and facility fees
Additional costs: Rehabilitation, follow-up care, medications
Indirect costs: Significant time off work, potential lost income
Future expenses: Potential revision surgeries or addressing complications
Cost-effectiveness: Higher lifetime cost for most patients

Long-Term Functional Considerations

Shockwave Therapy:

Biomechanics: Preserves natural movement patterns
Adaptation: Progressive return to activities
Future options: Preserves all future treatment options
Activity level: Few long-term activity restrictions
Aging considerations: Natural aging process maintained

Surgery:

Biomechanics: Often permanently altered
Adaptation: May require compensatory movements
Future options: May limit future treatment options
Activity level: Sometimes permanent activity restrictions
Aging considerations: May accelerate adjacent joint issues

Long-Term Quality of Life Impact

Shockwave Therapy:

Treatment experience: Minimal treatment discomfort
Recovery stress: Minimal psychological impact
Life disruption: Minimal interruption to normal life
Independence: Maintains functional independence
Long-term satisfaction: High when appropriate for condition

Surgery:

Treatment experience: Significant procedure stress
Recovery stress: Can be psychologically challenging
Life disruption: Major life adjustments during recovery
Independence: May require assistance during recovery
Long-term satisfaction: Variable based on expectations and outcomes

Real Patient Experiences: Long-Term Comparison

At Serenity Health Care Center in Waukesha, we’ve worked with many patients who chose shockwave therapy after considering surgery, as well as those who came to us after surgical interventions failed to provide lasting relief. Their experiences provide valuable insights into real-world long-term outcomes:

Case Study 1: Plantar Fasciitis – Surgery vs. Extracorporeal Shockwave

Robert’s experience with surgery: Robert underwent plantar fasciotomy surgery for chronic heel pain. While he experienced improvement in his original pain, he developed new biomechanical issues that affected his gait. Five years post-surgery, he still has occasional pain and cannot engage in high-impact activities.

Jennifer’s experience with shockwave therapy: Jennifer chose shockwave therapy for similar chronic heel pain after being recommended for surgery. After completing her 6-session protocol, she experienced progressive improvement over 3 months. Four years later, she remains pain-free and has returned to all activities, including long-distance running.

Case Study 2: Rotator Cuff – Comparing Different Shoulders

Michael’s experience: Michael, 54, had rotator cuff tendinopathy in both shoulders. He underwent surgical decompression on his right shoulder and chose shockwave therapy for his left shoulder two years later. At his three-year follow-up, he reported:

Right shoulder (surgery): 80% improvement, some permanent ROM limitations, 6-month recovery period
Left shoulder (shockwave): 90% improvement, full range of motion, 3-month recovery period, no complications

“If I could go back, I would have chosen shockwave for both shoulders. While surgery helped, the recovery was grueling, and I never got my full overhead reach back. The shockwave treatment was comparatively easy and gave me better function long-term.”

Case Study 3: Tennis Elbow – Shockwave After Failed Surgery

Sarah’s experience: Sarah underwent lateral epicondylar release surgery for tennis elbow with initially good results, but experienced pain recurrence 18 months later. Having undergone one surgery, she sought alternatives and chose shockwave therapy for her recurrent condition. Three years after shockwave treatment, she reports better pain relief and function than she experienced after surgery.

“Surgery seemed like the definitive solution, but when my pain came back, I was devastated. The shockwave therapy not only addressed my recurrent pain but gave me better long-term results than my surgery had. I wish I’d tried it first.”

Making Your Decision: Surgery or Extracorporeal Shockwave Therapy (ESWT)?

When deciding between these treatment options, consider these questions to help determine which might provide better long-term results for your specific situation:

Questions to Consider:

Has your condition been properly diagnosed? Both treatments work best when precisely targeted to the correct problem.
Have you exhausted appropriate conservative measures? Many conditions resolve with proper rehabilitation.
What is the exact nature and severity of your condition? Complete tears or severe structural issues may require surgery, while many painful conditions without major structural damage respond well to shockwave therapy.
How quickly do you need to recover? Surgery typically requires significant downtime, while shockwave allows immediate return to most activities.
What are your long-term activity goals? Consider which approach better preserves your ability to perform specific activities important to you.
What risks are you willing to accept? Surgery carries risks of complications that shockwave therapy does not.
What is your physiological healing capacity? Factors like age, circulation, and overall health affect outcomes for both treatments but particularly impact surgical recovery.

A Balanced Approach: When to Consider Each Option

Consider Extracorporeal Shockwave Therapy (ESWT) first when:

Your condition falls within its scope of effectiveness
You want to avoid surgical risks and downtime
Preserving natural anatomy is important to you
You’ve had limited success with conservative care
You want to maintain all future treatment options
You have contraindications to surgery

Consider surgery first when:

You have complete tears requiring repair
Significant structural instability exists
Mechanical problems require anatomical correction
You have not responded to comprehensive conservative and regenerative care
Your condition has clear surgical indicators with high success rates
You have no contraindications to surgery

The Hybrid Approach: Optimizing Long-Term Results

For many patients, the best long-term results come not from choosing one approach exclusively, but from strategic timing and combination of treatments. At Serenity Health Care Center, we consider several hybrid approaches:

Pre-Surgical Optimization

For patients who ultimately require surgery,extracorporeal shockwave therapy (ESWT) beforehand can:

Improve tissue quality before surgical intervention
Enhance blood flow to surgical areas
Potentially reduce post-surgical complications
Improve overall surgical outcomes

Post-Surgical Recovery Enhancement

For patients who have undergone surgery but face recovery challenges,extracorporeal shockwave therapy (ESWT) can:

Address post-surgical scar tissue
Improve circulation to the healing area
Reduce post-surgical pain and inflammation
Enhance long-term functional outcomes

Targeted Combination Approach

For complex conditions, a strategic combination may provide the best long-term results:

Addressing different aspects of a condition with appropriate treatments
Using minimally invasive surgeries when necessary, supported by regenerative approaches
Creating comprehensive protocols that combine the best elements of multiple approaches

Conclusion: Which Provides Better Long-Term Results?

Based on current research and clinical experience, the answer to were extracorporeal shockwave therapy or surgery provides better long-term results is nuanced:

For many common musculoskeletal conditions—particularly chronic tendinopathies, plantar fasciitis, and early to moderate degenerative conditions—extracorporeal shockwave therapy (ESWT) provides comparable or superior long-term clinical outcomes with significantly fewer risks, complications, and quality of life disruptions.

However, for conditions requiring structural repair (complete tears, instability, advanced degeneration), surgery remains the more appropriate option for long-term success.

The best approach is personalized decision-making based on:

Accurate diagnosis and condition assessment
Patient-specific factors and goals
Risk-benefit analysis for each option
Consideration of quality of life and functional outcomes
Long-term implications beyond simple symptom relief

At Serenity Health Care Center in Waukesha, Dr. Chong provides comprehensive evaluations to help patients determine the most appropriate treatment path for their specific condition. Whether extracorporeal shockwave therapy (ESWT), surgical referral, or a combination approach, our focus remains on providing the best long-term outcomes with the lowest risk and disruption to your life.

To explore whether extracorporeal shockwave therapy (ESWT) might provide better long-term results for your condition than surgery, call 262-522-8640 to schedule a consultation with Dr. Chong.

This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute medical advice. Please consult with a qualified healthcare provider to determine the best treatment approach for your specific condition.

Schedule An Appointment

Patient Portal

Ready To Get Started?

Reach out to Serenity Health Care Center by completing the form below.