Michaela C M Khan1,2, James O'Donovan3,4,5, Jesse M Charlton1,2, Jean-Sébastien Roy6,7, Michael A Hunt1,2, Jean-Francois Esculier8,9,10. 1. Motion Analysis and Biofeedback Laboratory, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada. 2. Department of Physical Therapy, University of British Columbia, 2177 Wesbrook Mall, Vancouver, BC, V6T 1Z3, Canada. 3. Department of Sports Medicine, Sports Surgery Clinic, Dublin, Ireland. 4. Sport Ireland Institute, National Sports Campus, Dublin, Ireland. 5. Department of Sports Medicine, National Orthopaedic Hospital, Dublin, Ireland. 6. Center for Interdisciplinary Research in Rehabilitation and Social Integration, Quebec City, QC, Canada. 7. Faculty of Medicine, Laval University, Quebec City, QC, Canada. 8. Motion Analysis and Biofeedback Laboratory, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada. jean-francois.esculier@ubc.ca. 9. Department of Physical Therapy, University of British Columbia, 2177 Wesbrook Mall, Vancouver, BC, V6T 1Z3, Canada. jean-francois.esculier@ubc.ca. 10. The Running Clinic, Lac Beauport, QC, Canada. jean-francois.esculier@ubc.ca.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Running is a popular activity practiced worldwide. It is important to understand how running affects joint health to provide recommendations to sports medicine practitioners and runners. OBJECTIVE: Our aim was to summarize the influence of running on lower limb cartilage morphology and composition using quantitative magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). METHODS: Prospective repeated-measures studies evaluating cartilage using MRI before and after running were included. Data sources included Pubmed, Embase, CINAHL, SportDiscus, Web of Science, and Cochrane Central Registry of Controlled Trials. Qualitative analyses considered the number and methodological quality ratings of studies based on the QualSyst tool, and recommendations were based on the strength of evidence (strong, moderate, limited, or very limited). Quantitative analysis involved meta-analyses, for which effect sizes were calculated as Hedge's g standardized mean differences. RESULTS: We included 43 articles, assessing seven outcomes (lesions, volume, thickness, glycosaminoglycan content, and T1ρ, T2, and T2* relaxation times). Nineteen articles were rated as high quality, 24 were rated as moderate quality, and none were rated as low quality. Qualitative analyses suggest that running may cause an immediate reduction in knee cartilage volume, thickness, as well as T1ρ and T2 relaxation times immediately; however, these changes did not persist. Meta-analyses revealed a small and moderate decrease immediately following a single running bout in T2 relaxation time in the medial femur and tibia, respectively. Qualitative analyses indicated that the influence of repeated exposure to running on cartilage morphology and composition was limited. Despite conflicting evidence regarding pre-existing knee cartilage lesions, moderate evidence suggests that running does not lead to the formation of new lesions. Repeated running exposure did not cause changes to foot and ankle cartilage thickness or composition. CONCLUSIONS: Changes to lower limb cartilage following running are transient. Immediate changes to cartilage morphology and composition, which likely reflect natural fluid dynamics, do not persist and were generally not significant when pooled statistically. Results suggest that cartilage recovers well from a single running bout and adapts to repeated exposure. Given that moderate evidence indicates that running does not lead to new lesions, future trials should focus on clinical populations, such as those with osteoarthritis. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Not applicable.
BACKGROUND: Running is a popular activity practiced worldwide. It is important to understand how running affects joint health to provide recommendations to sports medicine practitioners and runners. OBJECTIVE: Our aim was to summarize the influence of running on lower limb cartilage morphology and composition using quantitative magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). METHODS: Prospective repeated-measures studies evaluating cartilage using MRI before and after running were included. Data sources included Pubmed, Embase, CINAHL, SportDiscus, Web of Science, and Cochrane Central Registry of Controlled Trials. Qualitative analyses considered the number and methodological quality ratings of studies based on the QualSyst tool, and recommendations were based on the strength of evidence (strong, moderate, limited, or very limited). Quantitative analysis involved meta-analyses, for which effect sizes were calculated as Hedge's g standardized mean differences. RESULTS: We included 43 articles, assessing seven outcomes (lesions, volume, thickness, glycosaminoglycan content, and T1ρ, T2, and T2* relaxation times). Nineteen articles were rated as high quality, 24 were rated as moderate quality, and none were rated as low quality. Qualitative analyses suggest that running may cause an immediate reduction in knee cartilage volume, thickness, as well as T1ρ and T2 relaxation times immediately; however, these changes did not persist. Meta-analyses revealed a small and moderate decrease immediately following a single running bout in T2 relaxation time in the medial femur and tibia, respectively. Qualitative analyses indicated that the influence of repeated exposure to running on cartilage morphology and composition was limited. Despite conflicting evidence regarding pre-existing knee cartilage lesions, moderate evidence suggests that running does not lead to the formation of new lesions. Repeated running exposure did not cause changes to foot and ankle cartilage thickness or composition. CONCLUSIONS: Changes to lower limb cartilage following running are transient. Immediate changes to cartilage morphology and composition, which likely reflect natural fluid dynamics, do not persist and were generally not significant when pooled statistically. Results suggest that cartilage recovers well from a single running bout and adapts to repeated exposure. Given that moderate evidence indicates that running does not lead to new lesions, future trials should focus on clinical populations, such as those with osteoarthritis. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Not applicable.
Authors: R N van Gent; D Siem; M van Middelkoop; A G van Os; S M A Bierma-Zeinstra; B W Koes Journal: Br J Sports Med Date: 2007-05-01 Impact factor: 13.800
Authors: Jeffrey B Driban; Jennifer M Hootman; Michael R Sitler; Kyle P Harris; Nicole M Cattano Journal: J Athl Train Date: 2015-01-09 Impact factor: 2.860
Authors: Stephen P Messier; Claudine Legault; Casey R Schoenlank; Jovita Jolla Newman; David F Martin; Paul DeVita Journal: Med Sci Sports Exerc Date: 2008-11 Impact factor: 5.411
Authors: Jean-Francois Esculier; Manuela Besomi; Danilo de Oliveira Silva; Samuele Passigli; Michael Skovdal Rathleff; Marienke Van Middelkoop; Christian Barton; Michael J Callaghan; Matthew S Harkey; Alison M Hoens; Natasha M Krowchuk; Anthony Teoli; Bill Vicenzino; Richard W Willy; Michael A Hunt Journal: Orthop J Sports Med Date: 2022-09-30