C C Ooi1, M E Schneider, P Malliaras, P Counsel, D A Connell. 1. Department of Medical Imaging & Radiation Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, Nursing & Health Sciences, Monash University, Clayton Campus, Building 13C, Melbourne, VIC, 3800, Australia, gdrocc@sgh.com.sg.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To determine the prevalence of morphological and mechanical stiffness alterations at the mid Achilles tendon in asymptomatic marathon runners before and after a competition. To assess the relationship between pre-existing Achilles tendon alterations and pain after running. MATERIALS AND METHODS: All marathon runners from a local running club who were participating in the Melbourne Marathon 2013 (full marathon category) were invited for conventional ultrasound and sonoelastography 1 week leading up to the marathon and again within 3 days post-marathon. Another group of active, healthy individuals not involved in running activities were recruited as controls. Intratendinous morphological (tendon thickness, hypoechogenicities), Doppler as well as stiffness properties of the Achilles were recorded. Achilles tendon pain was evaluated using the visual analogue scale (VAS) and Victorian Institute of Sports Assessment-Achilles (VISA-A). RESULTS: Twenty-one asymptomatic runners (42 Achilles tendons) and 20 healthy controls (40 Achilles tendons) were examined. On the pre-marathon evaluation, runners showed significantly more morphological changes on B-mode ultrasound compared to the controls (p < 0.001). Marathon running induced a significant reduction in tendon stiffness (p = 0.049) and an increase in Doppler signals (p = 0.036). Four runners (4/21, 19%) reported Achilles tendon pain after the race [VAS 4.0 (±1.9), VISA 74.2 (±10.1)]. Reduced tendon stiffness at baseline was associated with post-marathon Achilles tendon pain (p = 0.016). CONCLUSION: Marathon runners demonstrate a higher prevalence of morphological alterations compared to non-runners. Marathon running caused a significant change in Achilles tendon stiffness and Doppler signals. Pre-existing soft Achilles tendon properties on sonoelastography may be a predisposing risk for development of symptoms post-running.
OBJECTIVE: To determine the prevalence of morphological and mechanical stiffness alterations at the mid Achilles tendon in asymptomatic marathon runners before and after a competition. To assess the relationship between pre-existing Achilles tendon alterations and pain after running. MATERIALS AND METHODS: All marathon runners from a local running club who were participating in the Melbourne Marathon 2013 (full marathon category) were invited for conventional ultrasound and sonoelastography 1 week leading up to the marathon and again within 3 days post-marathon. Another group of active, healthy individuals not involved in running activities were recruited as controls. Intratendinous morphological (tendon thickness, hypoechogenicities), Doppler as well as stiffness properties of the Achilles were recorded. Achilles tendon pain was evaluated using the visual analogue scale (VAS) and Victorian Institute of Sports Assessment-Achilles (VISA-A). RESULTS: Twenty-one asymptomatic runners (42 Achilles tendons) and 20 healthy controls (40 Achilles tendons) were examined. On the pre-marathon evaluation, runners showed significantly more morphological changes on B-mode ultrasound compared to the controls (p < 0.001). Marathon running induced a significant reduction in tendon stiffness (p = 0.049) and an increase in Doppler signals (p = 0.036). Four runners (4/21, 19%) reported Achilles tendon pain after the race [VAS 4.0 (±1.9), VISA 74.2 (±10.1)]. Reduced tendon stiffness at baseline was associated with post-marathon Achilles tendon pain (p = 0.016). CONCLUSION: Marathon runners demonstrate a higher prevalence of morphological alterations compared to non-runners. Marathon running caused a significant change in Achilles tendon stiffness and Doppler signals. Pre-existing soft Achilles tendon properties on sonoelastography may be a predisposing risk for development of symptoms post-running.
Authors: Stuart J Warden; Zoltan S Kiss; Frank A Malara; Alistair B T Ooi; Jill L Cook; Kay M Crossley Journal: Am J Sports Med Date: 2007-01-29 Impact factor: 6.202
Authors: J M Robinson; J L Cook; C Purdam; P J Visentini; J Ross; N Maffulli; J E Taunton; K M Khan Journal: Br J Sports Med Date: 2001-10 Impact factor: 13.800
Authors: T De Zordo; R Chhem; V Smekal; G Feuchtner; M Reindl; C Fink; R Faschingbauer; W Jaschke; A S Klauser Journal: Ultraschall Med Date: 2009-11-27 Impact factor: 6.548
Authors: Luca Maria Sconfienza; Domenico Albano; Georgina Allen; Alberto Bazzocchi; Bianca Bignotti; Vito Chianca; Fernando Facal de Castro; Elena E Drakonaki; Elena Gallardo; Jan Gielen; Andrea Sabine Klauser; Carlo Martinoli; Giovanni Mauri; Eugene McNally; Carmelo Messina; Rebeca Mirón Mombiela; Davide Orlandi; Athena Plagou; Magdalena Posadzy; Rosa de la Puente; Monique Reijnierse; Federica Rossi; Saulius Rutkauskas; Ziga Snoj; Jelena Vucetic; David Wilson; Alberto Stefano Tagliafico Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2018-06-06 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Lucas Maciel Rabello; Iris Sophie Albers; Mathijs van Ark; Ron L Diercks; Inge van den Akker-Scheek; Johannes Zwerver Journal: J Athl Train Date: 2020-01-14 Impact factor: 2.860
Authors: Daniel M Cushman; Ziva Petrin; Keith Cummings; Sarah F Eby; Joy English; Masaru Teramoto Journal: Clin J Sport Med Date: 2021-11-10 Impact factor: 3.454
Authors: Daniel M Cushman; Ziva Petrin; Sarah Eby; Nathan D Clements; Peter Haight; Brian Snitily; Masaru Teramoto Journal: Phys Sportsmed Date: 2020-11-26 Impact factor: 2.241
Authors: Sarah Dex; Paolo Alberton; Lena Willkomm; Thomas Söllradl; Sandra Bago; Stefan Milz; Mehdi Shakibaei; Anita Ignatius; Wilhelm Bloch; Hauke Clausen-Schaumann; Chisa Shukunami; Matthias Schieker; Denitsa Docheva Journal: EBioMedicine Date: 2017-05-05 Impact factor: 8.143