| Literature DB >> 28203599 |
Bertrand Sonnery-Cottet1, Nuno Camelo Barbosa1, Sanesh Tuteja1, Roland Gardon1, Matt Daggett2, Damien Monnot1, Charles Kajetanek1, Mathieu Thaunat1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Rectus femoris injuries are common among athletes, especially in kicking sports such as soccer; however, proximal rectus femoris avulsions in athletes are a relatively rare entity. PURPOSE/HYPOTHESIS: The purpose of this study was to describe and report the results of an original technique of surgical excision of the proximal tendon remnant followed by a muscular suture repair. Our hypothesis was that this technique limits the risk of recurrence in high-level athletes and allows for rapid recovery without loss of quadriceps strength. STUDYEntities:
Keywords: proximal avulsion; quadriceps injuries; rectus femoris; surgical treatment
Year: 2017 PMID: 28203599 PMCID: PMC5298416 DOI: 10.1177/2325967116683940
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Orthop J Sports Med ISSN: 2325-9671
Figure 1.Magnetic resonance image demonstrating a reflected tendon tear and a direct tendon tear in the same patient.
Figure 2.(A) Anatomic landmarks for the Hueter anterior approach. (B) The tensor fascia lata (TFL) muscle is retracted laterally. (C) Reflected tendon and direct tendon identification. (D) Excised tendon.
Patient Demographics
| Patient No. | Age, y | Side | Rectus Femoris Strains in the 9 Months Before Surgery, n | Return to Play, wk | Follow-up, mo | Complications |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 26 | Right | 3 | 16 | 9 | No |
| 2 | 36 | Right | 2 | 14 | 32 | No |
| 3 | 30 | Right | 2 | 13 | 32 | No |
| 4 | 34 | Left | 0 | 16 | 9 | No |
| 5 | 33 | Right | 2 | 16 | 9 | Hematoma |
Partial intrasubstance strain at the myotendinous proximal insertion.
Postoperative Isokinetic Test Interpretations
| Test | Normal Value | Player 1 | Player 2 | Player 3 | Player 4 | Player 5 | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Difference of quadriceps maximal concentric strength moment at 60 deg/s between operated and healthy knee (%) | Physiological: difference of ±10% Moderate-low: deficit >10% and ≤15% Moderate-high: deficit >15% or <20% | –16.4% | +16.2% | +12.2% | –15.7% | –11.3% | |||||
| Healthy | Operated | Healthy | Operated | Healthy | Operated | Healthy | Operated | Healthy | Operated | ||
| Conventional ratio | >0.5 | 0.64 | 0.54 | 0.99 | 0.82 | 0.74 | 0.94 | 0.64 | 0.59 | 0.95 | 0.74 |
| Functional ratio | 0.90 | 1.41 | 1.07 | 1.6 | 1.24 | 1.06 | 1.55 | 1.10 | 1.25 | 1.06 | 1.05 |
Maximal concentric strength moment at 60 deg/s (hamstrings) divided by the maximal concentric strength moment at 60 deg/s (quadriceps).
Maximal eccentric strength moment at 30 deg/s (hamstrings) divided by the maximal eccentric strength moment at 240 deg/s (quadriceps).
Figure 3.Treatment algorithm.