| Literature DB >> 30072398 |
Robert Schleip1, Paul William Hodges2, Martina Zügel3, Constantinos N Maganaris4, Jan Wilke5, Karin Jurkat-Rott6, Werner Klingler7, Scott C Wearing8, Thomas Findley9, Mary F Barbe10, Jürgen Michael Steinacker3, Andry Vleeming11, Wilhelm Bloch12.
Abstract
The fascial system builds a three-dimensional continuum of soft, collagen-containing, loose and dense fibrous connective tissue that permeates the body and enables all body systems to operate in an integrated manner. Injuries to the fascial system cause a significant loss of performance in recreational exercise as well as high-performance sports, and could have a potential role in the development and perpetuation of musculoskeletal disorders, including lower back pain. Fascial tissues deserve more detailed attention in the field of sports medicine. A better understanding of their adaptation dynamics to mechanical loading as well as to biochemical conditions promises valuable improvements in terms of injury prevention, athletic performance and sports-related rehabilitation. This consensus statement reflects the state of knowledge regarding the role of fascial tissues in the discipline of sports medicine. It aims to (1) provide an overview of the contemporary state of knowledge regarding the fascial system from the microlevel (molecular and cellular responses) to the macrolevel (mechanical properties), (2) summarise the responses of the fascial system to altered loading (physical exercise), to injury and other physiological challenges including ageing, (3) outline the methods available to study the fascial system, and (4) highlight the contemporary view of interventions that target fascial tissue in sport and exercise medicine. Advancing this field will require a coordinated effort of researchers and clinicians combining mechanobiology, exercise physiology and improved assessment technologies. © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2018. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.Entities:
Keywords: consensus statement; injury; soft tissue; tendon
Mesh:
Year: 2018 PMID: 30072398 PMCID: PMC6241620 DOI: 10.1136/bjsports-2018-099308
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Br J Sports Med ISSN: 0306-3674 Impact factor: 13.800
Figure 1Components of the fascial system. The fascial system includes large aponeuroses like the first layer of the thoracolumbar fascia (A), but also a myriad of enveloping containers around and within skeletal muscles (B) and most other organs of the body. The internal structure of fascial tissues is dominated by collagen fibres which are embedded in a semiliquid ground substance (C). Images with friendly permission from fascialnet.com (A) and thomas-stephan.com (C).
Figure 2Transmission electron microscopy reveals the close cell–ECM interaction in human skeletal muscle (musculus vastus lateralis, 25 000× magnification) allowing a bidirectional cell–ECM interaction. Myofilaments (MF) are connected by Z-lines (Z) and costameres (C) to the adjacent basal lamina (BL) and the surrounding reticular lamina (RL). Crossbridging structures (arrows) connect the Z-lines and costameres to the dense part of the basal lamina. The reticular lamina is structured by a network of collagen fibrils (CF) and additional ECM molecules, which have a close connection to the basal lamina allowing bidirectional transmission of mechanical forces. ECM, extracellular matrix.
Figure 3Factors influencing the mechanical stiffness of fascial tissues and their hypothesised impact. Up arrows symbolise a positive effect (eg, increased cellular contractility increases stiffness), down arrows symbolise a negative effect (eg, increased use of corticosteroids decreases stiffness) and double arrows symbolise an ambiguous association (eg, hyaluronan decreases stiffness if mobilised by mechanical stimuli, but leads to increased stiffness if no stimuli are applied). ECM, extracellular matrix.
Figure 4Proposed timeline and mechanisms for fascial, adipose and muscle changes in the multifidus muscle after intervertebral disc lesion. Three phases, acute (top), subacute-early chronic (middle) and chronic (bottom), are characterised by different structural and inflammatory changes. IL-1β, interleukin-1β; TNF, tumour necrosis factor.
Currently used diagnostic methods to examine fascial tissue structure and function
| Method | Assessment target | Advantages | Disadvantages | References |
| Biopsy | Histological properties including molecular analysis. | Permits analysis of tissue damage, infiltration of inflammatory cells, cytokines and others. | Invasiveness. |
|
| Bioimpedance | Hydration changes. | High sensitivity. | Lacking data on reliability and validity for smaller regions. |
|
| Manual palpation | Stiffness, elasticity and shearing mobility of tissue. | Cost-effectiveness. | Limited reliability. |
|
| Indentometry | Stiffness and elasticity. | Established reproducibility. | Limited depth. | ) |
| Ultrasound (US) imaging | Thickness of layers, tendon elongation. | Permits diagnosis of a fibrotic thickening (eg, of a particular endomysium) or of tendon strain response during loading. | Difficulty in standardising the exact viewing angle. |
|
| US with correlation software | Relative shearing motion of adjacent layers. | Permits diagnosis of adhesive tissue connections, such as in chronic low back pain. | Lacking standards for selection of regions of interest. |
|
| Compression-based US elastography | Stiffness. | Measurements possible at further depth than, for example, with indentometry. | Lack of standardisation. |
|
| Shear-wave US elastography | Stiffness. | Enhancement by propagation analysis permits morphological analysis. | Lack of standardisation. |
|
| B-mode ultrasonography | Tendon structure and mechanical/material properties. |
In vivo methodology. Application in perspective studies. Relatively inexpensive. |
Accuracy is user-dependent. Applicability is limited to superficial tendons mainly. Limited control of any mediolateral deviation of the tendon line of pull off the scanning plane. Tendon slack length (ie, at 0% strain) and tendon force cannot be directly measured and need to be estimated. Scanning frame rate is currently limited. |
|
Figure 5Tendon displacement measured by B-mode ultrasound. Sonographic images of the human tibialis anterior (TA) muscle at rest (top) and in response to electrical stimulation at 75 V (middle) and 150 V (bottom). The white arrow indicates the TA tendon origin. Notice the proximal shift of the TA tendon origin on electrical stimulation.88