| Literature DB >> 31139262 |
Alessandro Schneebeli1,2, Filippo Del Grande3, Deborah Falla2, Corrado Cescon1, Ron Clijsen4,5,6, Marco Barbero1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Mechanical and morphological properties of the Achilles tendon are altered in disease and in response to changes in mechanical loading. In the last few years different ultrasound based technologies have been used to detect tendon mechanical properties changes mainly in resting condition. Therefore the aim of this study was to evaluate if strain sonoelastography can identify changes in Achilles tendon elasticity during isometric contractions of increasing intensity.Entities:
Keywords: Achilles tendon; Elasticity; Strain sonoelastography
Mesh:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31139262 PMCID: PMC6528184 DOI: 10.1186/s13047-019-0342-1
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Foot Ankle Res ISSN: 1757-1146 Impact factor: 2.303
Fig. 1Schematic of the experimental setup. The foot was securely attached to a dynamometer with a wooden board at a fixed angle of 0° of dorsiflexion. The force measured by the load cell was proportional to the torque exerted at the ankle level. The ultrasound probe was placed in a longitudinal scan at the level of the medial malleolus
Fig. 3Achilles tendon sonoelastography during an isometric ramp contraction. Elasto-Dual images of the Achilles tendon during the isometric ramp contraction; the regions of interest (i.e., yellow boxes) define the two tissues examined for the calculation of the strain ratio. The six different boxes represent the different contraction levels
Fig. 2Force-elasticity curve. Box plot showing the median and interquartile range of values of the entire sample during the different contraction levels. The orange line represent the force-elasticity curve. * p < 0.01; statistical significant difference between the different contraction levels
Pairwise comparison for the different contraction levels. Statistical significant results (p < 0.01) are represented in bold
| Contraction levels (Kg) | Pairwise comparison | Contraction levels (Kg) | Pairwise comparison | Contraction levels (Kg) | Pairwise comparison | Contraction levels (Kg) | Pairwise comparison | Contraction levels (Kg) | Pairwise comparison |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0–0.5 | 0.5–1 | 1–2 | 2–5 | 5–10 | |||||
| 0–1 | 0.5–2 | 1–5 | 2–10 | – | – | ||||
| 0–2 | 0.5–5 | 1–10 | – | – | – | – | |||
| 0–5 | 0.5–10 | – | – | – | – | – | – | ||
| 0–10 | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | – |