| Literature DB >> 33612019 |
Lasse Lempainen1,2, Jussi Kosola2,3, Ricard Pruna4, Juha-Jaakko Sinikumpu5, Xavier Valle4, Olli Heinonen2, Sakari Orava6,2, Nicola Maffulli7,8.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Hamstring injuries are common and can now be accurately diagnosed. In addition, novel surgical indications have been introduced. However, evidence-based guidelines on the hamstring injuries in management of top-level athletes are missing.Entities:
Keywords: Hamstring injury; athlete; biceps femoris; semimembranosus; semitendinosus; surgical treatment; tendon
Mesh:
Year: 2021 PMID: 33612019 PMCID: PMC8688976 DOI: 10.1177/1457496920984274
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Scand J Surg ISSN: 1457-4969 Impact factor: 2.360
Fig. 1.The illustrative drawing of each individual hamstring structure: A) tendons, B) muscles.
Fig. 2.Comparison between current and modern treatment algorithms based on the present literature.
Fig. 3.Complete three-tendon proximal hamstring rupture with a clear retraction at the right side.
Fig. 4.Perioperative image of the complete proximal two-tendon (BF and ST)—rupture. Arrow showing the ruptured area.
Fig. 5.Isolated complete proximal single-tendon rupture: A) BF (MRI and perioperative images), B) SM (MRI and perioperative images).
Fig. 6.A) Distal tendon rupture of the ST (MRI and perioperative images before and after repair) and B) distal MTJ area rupture of the BF (MRI images, arrows indicate the retracted muscle belly and tendon stump).
Fig. 7.A) Central tendon rupture of the SM (recurrent injury, MRI and perioperative images before and after repair) and B) BF (acute injury, MRI).