OBJECTIVES: To determine the interest of a muscle rehabilitation program following anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ligamentoplasty) and the influence of leucine supplementation on the muscle strength of athletes undergoing reathletization. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The authors have analyzed prospectively, in double blind, two groups of athletes (22 versus 23) who had randomly received eitherleucine supplementation or a placebo. Muscle strength was measured at the beginning and the end of the program In terms of thigh perimeter, isokinetic testing results, single-leg test and percentage of body fat. The reathletization program was identical in the two groups for an average of 2.7weeks. RESULTS: By the end of the program, both groups had increased their thigh perimeter at 10 and 15cm from the patella (respectively 1.2cm and 1.3cm, P<0.0001). Fat mass had decreased by 1.28% (P=0.017). Values of isokinetic muscle strength for the injured limb improved by 13 to 55% with highly significant differences. The leucine group generally showed more improved muscle parameters than the placebo group, with only one significant positive result with regard to thigh muscle perimeter at 10cm from the patella (P=0.009). CONCLUSION: With or without leucine, the rehabilitation program leads to improved muscle quality. Taking leucine appears to promote muscle recovery of the injured limb with regard to a single parameter (thigh muscle perimeter at 10cm from the patella), while the other parameters showed no significant improvement. A complementary study associating the recovery phase with other dietary supplements might help to optimize these preliminary results.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVES: To determine the interest of a muscle rehabilitation program following anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ligamentoplasty) and the influence of leucine supplementation on the muscle strength of athletes undergoing reathletization. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The authors have analyzed prospectively, in double blind, two groups of athletes (22 versus 23) who had randomly received either leucine supplementation or a placebo. Muscle strength was measured at the beginning and the end of the program In terms of thigh perimeter, isokinetic testing results, single-leg test and percentage of body fat. The reathletization program was identical in the two groups for an average of 2.7weeks. RESULTS: By the end of the program, both groups had increased their thigh perimeter at 10 and 15cm from the patella (respectively 1.2cm and 1.3cm, P<0.0001). Fat mass had decreased by 1.28% (P=0.017). Values of isokinetic muscle strength for the injured limb improved by 13 to 55% with highly significant differences. The leucine group generally showed more improved muscle parameters than the placebo group, with only one significant positive result with regard to thigh muscle perimeter at 10cm from the patella (P=0.009). CONCLUSION: With or without leucine, the rehabilitation program leads to improved muscle quality. Taking leucine appears to promote muscle recovery of the injured limb with regard to a single parameter (thigh muscle perimeter at 10cm from the patella), while the other parameters showed no significant improvement. A complementary study associating the recovery phase with other dietary supplements might help to optimize these preliminary results.