Estimation of return-to-sports-time for athletes with stress fracture – an approach combining risk level of fracture site with severity based on imaging

BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders

Holger Amthauer²  Christoph H Lohmann¹  Gerhard Ulrich²  Gero Wieners²  Alina Zarva²  Frank Fischbach²  Ingo G Steffen²  Max Seidensticker²  Juri Ruf²  Birgit Hoffmeyer¹  Oliver Dobrindt² 

[1] Orthopädische Universitätsklinik, Universitätsklinikum Magdeburg A.ö.R. Otto-von-Guericke Universität, Leipziger Straße 44, Magdeburg 39120, Germany;Klinik für Radiologie und Nuklearmedizin, Universitätsklinikum Magdeburg A.ö.R. Otto-von-Guericke Universität, Leipziger Straße 44, Magdeburg 39120, Germany

关键词: Bone scintigraphy;    MRI;    Athletes;    Grading system;    Stress fracture;   

Others  :  1146012
DOI  :  10.1186/1471-2474-13-139

 received in 2012-01-11, accepted in 2012-07-30,  发布年份 2012

【 摘 要 】

Background

The aim was to compare the return-to-sports-time (RTST) following stress fractures on the basis of site and severity of injury. This retrospective study was set up at a single institution. Diagnosis was confirmed by an interdisciplinary adjudication panel and images were rated in a blinded-read setting.

Methods

52 athletes (female, n = 30; male, n = 22; mean age, 22.8 years) with stress fracture (SFX) who had undergone at least one examination, either MRI or bone scintigraphy, were included. Magnetic resonance images (MRI) and/or bone scintigraphy (BS) of SFX were classified as either low- or high-grade SFX, according to existing grading systems. For MRI, high-grade SFX was defined as visibility of a fracture line or bone marrow edema in T1-, T2-weighted and short tau inversion recovery (STIR) sequences, with low-grade SFX showing no fracture line and bone marrow edema only in STIR and/or T2-weighted sequences. In BS images, a mild and poorly defined focal tracer uptake represented a low-grade lesion, whereas an intense and sharply marginated uptake marked a high-grade SFX. In addition, all injuries were categorized by location as high- or low-risk stress fractures. RTST was obtained from the clinical records. All patients were treated according to a non-weight-bearing treatment plan and comprehensive follow-up data was complete until full recovery. Two-sided Wilcoxon’s rank sum test was used for group comparisons.

Results

High-risk SFX had a mean RTST of 132 days (d) [IQR 64d – 132d] compared to 119d [IQR 50d – 110d] for low-risk sites (p = 0.19). RTST was significantly longer (p = 0.01) in high-grade lesions [mean, 143d; IQR 66d – 134d] than in low-grade [mean, 95d; IQR 42d – 94d]. Analysis of high-risk SFX showed no difference in RTST (p = 0.45) between high- and low-grade [mean, 131d; IQR 72d – 123d vs. mean, 135d; IQR 63d – 132d]. In contrast, the difference was significant for low-risk SFX (p = 0.005) [low-grade; mean, 61d; IQR 35d – 78d vs. high-grade; mean, 153d; IQR 64d – 164d].

Conclusion

For SFX at low-risk sites, the significant difference in RTST between low- and high-grade lesions allows more accurate estimation of RTST by this approach. Both location of the injury and severity determined by imaging should therefore be considered for prediction of RTST.

【 授权许可】

   
2012 Dobrindt et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 图 表 】

Figure 1.

Figure 2.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Berger FH, de Jonge MC, Maas M: Stress fractures in the lower extremity. The importance of increasing awareness amongst radiologists. Eur J Radiol 2007, 62:16-26.
• [2]Anderson MW, Greenspan A: Stress fractures. Radiology 1996, 199:1-12.
• [3]Arendt EA, Griffiths HJ: The use of MR imaging in the assessment and clinical management of stress reactions of bone in high-performance athletes. Clin Sports Med 1997, 16:291-306.
• [4]Bennell KL, Malcolm SA, Thomas SA, et al.: The incidence and distribution of stress fractures in competitive track and field athletes. A twelve-month prospective study. Am J Sports Med 1996, 24:211-217.
• [5]Arendt E, Agel J, Heikes C, et al.: Stress injuries to bone in college athletes: a retrospective review of experience at a single institution. Am J Sports Med 2003, 31:959-968.
• [6]Boden BP, Osbahr DC, Jimenez C: Low-risk stress fractures. Am J Sports Med 2001, 29:100-111.
• [7]Matheson GO, Clement DB, McKenzie DC, et al.: Stress fractures in athletes. A study of 320 cases. Am J Sports Med 1987, 15:46-58.
• [8]Chisin R, Milgrom C, Giladi M, et al.: Clinical significance of nonfocal scintigraphic findings in suspected tibial stress fractures. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1987, 220:200-205.
• [9]Raasch WG, Hergan DJ: Treatment of stress fractures: the fundamentals. Clin Sports Med 2006, 25:29-36.
• [10]Harrast MA, Colonno D: Stress fractures in runners. Clin Sports Med 2010, 29:399-416.
• [11]Patel DR: Stress fractures: diagnosis and management in the primary care setting. Pediatr Clin North Am 2010, 57:819-827.
• [12]Dobrindt O, Hoffmeyer B, Ruf J, Steffen IG, Zarva A, Richter WS, Furth C, Ulrich G, Großer OS, Neumann W, Amthauer H: Blinded-read of bone scintigraphy: the impact on diagnosis and healing time for stress injuries with emphasis on the foot. Clin Nucl Med 2011, 36:186-191.
• [13]Gaeta M, Minutoli F, Scribano E, et al.: CT and MR imaging findings in athletes with early tibial stress injuries: comparison with bone scintigraphy findings and emphasis on cortical abnormalities. Radiology 2005, 235:553-561.
• [14]Hodler J, Steinert H, Zanetti M, et al.: Radiographically negative stress related bone injury. MR imaging versus two-phase bone scintigraphy. Acta Radiol 1998, 39:416-420.
• [15]Kiuru MJ, Pihlajamaki HK, Hietanen HJ, et al.: MR imaging, bone scintigraphy, and radiography in bone stress injuries of the pelvis and the lower extremity. Acta Radiol 2002, 43:207-212.
• [16]Ishibashi Y, Okamura Y, Otsuka H, Nishizawa K, Sasaki T, Toh S: Comparison of scintigraphy and magnetic resonance imaging for stress injuries of bone. Clin J Sport Med 2002, 12:79-84.
• [17]Fredericson M, Bergman AG, Hoffman KL, Dillingham MS: Tibial stress reaction in runners. Correlation of clinical symptoms and scintigraphy with a new magnetic resonance imaging grading system. Am J Sports Med 1995, 23:472-481.
• [18]Landis JR, Koch GG: The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics 1977, 33:159-174.
• [19]Dutton J, Bromhead SE, Speed CA, et al.: Clinical value of grading the scintigraphic appearances of tibial stress fractures in military recruits. Clin Nucl Med 2002, 27:18-21.
• [20]Yao L, Johnson C, Gentili A, Lee JK, Seeger LL: Stress injuries of bone: analysis of MR imaging staging criteria. Acad Radiol 1998, 5:34-40.
• [21]Thelen MD: Identification of a high-risk anterior tibial stress fracture. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2010, 40:833.