Treatment of muscle injuries in football.

Muscle injuries are frequent and represent one of the most substantial medical problems in professional football. They can have both traumatic and overuse causes with direct practical consequence due to differences in terms of the post-primary care regimen and prognosis. An accurate diagnosis is the first step towards a specific treatment and usually allows to predict return to play (RTP). Current treatment principles have no firm scientific basis; they are practiced largely as empirical medicine due to a lack of prospective randomised studies. Immediate treatment usually follows the PRICE-principle (protection, rest, ice, compression, elevation). Depending on the type of the muscle injury, specific physical and physiotherapeutical procedures as well as rehabilitative exercises and gradual training therapy are used to recondition the injured structure, to restore coordination and proprioception, and to normalise movement patterns. Injection therapy with various substances is frequently used, with positive results empirically, but evidence in form of prospective randomised studies is lacking. A precise rehabilitation plan should be developed for every muscle injury, including recommendations for sport-specific training with increasing intensity. Since there are no guidelines regarding safe RTP, regular follow-up examinations on the current muscle status are crucial to evaluate the progress made in terms of healing and to determine when the injured muscle can be exposed to the next step of load. This narrative review describes the various factors that a medical team should consider during assessment, treatment and rehabilitation of a muscle injury with particular focus on professional football.

Nonoperative treatment and return to play after complete proximal adductor avulsion in high-performance athletes.

PURPOSE: To assess the outcome of nonoperative treatment after complete avulsion of the proximal adductor longus tendon in high-performance athletes. METHODS: Six consecutive athletes were included. Treatment was conservative following a strict rehabilitation plan. Following parameters were analysed: basic data, mechanism of injury, classification, tendon retraction, size of defect in MRI and return to play (RTP). RESULTS: Mean age at injury was 28 ± 5 (range 20-32) years. Overstretch (83 %) and kicking (50 %) were the most frequent injury mechanisms, and the dominant leg was involved in 83 %. Average retraction of the avulsed tendon amounted 21 ± 5 mm. Follow-up MRIs demonstrated a gradual reattachment of the tendon in all cases. All athletes returned to full sportive activity on preinjury level within 88.7 ± 12.8 (range 75-110) days with no functional deficiencies. Manual muscle strength was equal to the contralateral side. CONCLUSION: Nonoperative treatment with a healing phase and a strict rehabilitation plan results in a functional, efficient reattachment of the tendon and allows unrestricted RTP. Since these injuries are rare, present study may help sports physicians when dealing with this type of injuries in professional athletes. Return to sports can be expected at approximately 13 weeks after injury, but can take even longer. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Case series, Level IV.

Intravenous bisphosphonates and vitamin D in the treatment of bone marrow oedema in professional athletes.

INTRODUCTION: The goal of this retrospective study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of ibandronate for bone marrow oedema (BMO) syndrome and stress fracture cases, and to demonstrate an additional field of therapeutic importance-the high-performance athlete. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This retrospective study included twenty-five high-performance athletes. Sixty per cent of the athletes were European soccer players and 40.0% other high-class international athletes (3 women and 22 men with an average age of 25.0±4.2), with BMO of the lower trunk or extremity diagnosed by magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). The treatment regimen consisted of high-dose vitamin D supplementation and intravenous ibandronate therapy. RESULTS: The time between the onset of pain and proper diagnosis of BMO was 106.3±104.1 days. Excellent pain reduction (pain at rest and under strain) and improved mobility was reported within the first two weeks after the first ibandronate administration by sixteen patients (64%). The time from first treatment until return to competition (RTC) was on average 102.6±65.2 days in total. If the time from onset of pain until diagnosis was within 40 days, the RTC was significantly reduced (p≤0.05) to almost 50% (63.8±48.1 days) when compared to the athletes with later diagnosis (124.4±63.2 days). CONCLUSIONS: The here-applied therapy regimen of intravenous BPs application and vitamin D supplementation in BMO syndrome has a beneficial effect for high-performance athletes. An early diagnosis and rapid treatment start can reduce the RTC significantly. An optimal bone metabolism with sufficient daily calcium and vitamin D intake is crucial and should not only be strived for the professional but also for the recreational athlete.

Terminology and classification of muscle injuries in sport: the Munich consensus statement.

OBJECTIVE: To provide a clear terminology and classification of muscle injuries in order to facilitate effective communication among medical practitioners and development of systematic treatment strategies. METHODS: Thirty native English-speaking scientists and team doctors of national and first division professional sports teams were asked to complete a questionnaire on muscle injuries to evaluate the currently used terminology of athletic muscle injury. In addition, a consensus meeting of international sports medicine experts was established to develop practical and scientific definitions of muscle injuries as well as a new and comprehensive classification system. RESULTS: The response rate of the survey was 63%. The responses confirmed the marked variability in the use of the terminology relating to muscle injury, with the most obvious inconsistencies for the term strain. In the consensus meeting, practical and systematic terms were defined and established. In addition, a new comprehensive classification system was developed, which differentiates between four types: functional muscle disorders (type 1: overexertion-related and type 2: neuromuscular muscle disorders) describing disorders without macroscopic evidence of fibre tear and structural muscle injuries (type 3: partial tears and type 4: (sub)total tears/tendinous avulsions) with macroscopic evidence of fibre tear, that is, structural damage. Subclassifications are presented for each type. CONCLUSIONS: A consistent English terminology as well as a comprehensive classification system for athletic muscle injuries which is proven in the daily practice are presented. This will help to improve clarity of communication for diagnostic and therapeutic purposes and can serve as the basis for future comparative studies to address the continued lack of systematic information on muscle injuries in the literature. WHAT ARE THE NEW THINGS: Consensus definitions of the terminology which is used in the field of muscle injuries as well as a new comprehensive classification system which clearly defines types of athletic muscle injuries. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Expert opinion, Level V.