Proximal hamstring tendon avulsions: comparable clinical outcomes of operative and non-operative treatment at 1-year follow-up using a shared decision-making model

被引:16
作者
van der Made, Anne D. [1 ,2 ,3 ]
Peters, Rolf W. [2 ,3 ,4 ]
Verheul, Claire [2 ,3 ,5 ]
Smithuis, Frank F. [2 ,3 ,6 ]
Reurink, Gustaaf [2 ,3 ,7 ]
Moen, Maarten H. [7 ]
Tol, Johannes L. [2 ,3 ,8 ]
Kerkhoffs, Gino M. M. J. [1 ,2 ,3 ]
机构
[1] Univ Amsterdam, Dept Orthoped Surg, Amsterdam Movement Sci, Amsterdam UMC, Amsterdam, Netherlands
[2] Amsterdam UMC, Acad Ctr Evidence Based Sports Med Aces, Amsterdam, Netherlands
[3] AMC VUmc IOC Res Ctr, Amsterdam Collaborat Hlth & Safety Sports ACHSS, Amsterdam, Netherlands
[4] Univ Amsterdam, Dept Trauma Surg, Amsterdam Movement Sci, Amsterdam UMC, Amsterdam, Netherlands
[5] Fysioklin Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands
[6] Univ Amsterdam, Dept Radiol, Amsterdam Movement Sci, Amsterdam UMC, Amsterdam, Netherlands
[7] Onze Lieve Vrouw Hosp, Sports Phys Grp, Amsterdam, Netherlands
[8] Aspetar Orthopaed & Sports Med Hosp, Doha, Qatar
关键词
tendon; rupture; tear; hamstring tendons; SURGICAL REPAIR; RELIABILITY; INJURIES; RUPTURES;
D O I
10.1136/bjsports-2021-104588
中图分类号
G8 [体育];
学科分类号
04 ; 0403 ;
摘要
Objective To prospectively evaluate 1-year clinical and radiological outcomes after operative and non-operative treatment of proximal hamstring tendon avulsions. Methods Patients with an MRI-confirmed proximal hamstring tendon avulsion were included. Operative or non-operative treatment was selected by a shared decision-making process. The primary outcome was the Perth Hamstring Assessment Tool (PHAT) score. Secondary outcome scores were Proximal Hamstring Injury Questionnaire, EQ-5D-3L, Tegner Activity Scale, return to sports, hamstring flexibility, isometric hamstring strength and MRI findings including proximal continuity. Results Twenty-six operative and 33 non-operative patients with a median age of 51 (IQR: 37-57) and 49 (IQR: 45-56) years were included. Median time between injury and initial visit was 12 (IQR 6-19) days for operative and 21 (IQR 12-48) days for non-operative patients (p=0.004). Baseline PHAT scores were significantly lower in the operative group (32 +/- 16 vs 45 +/- 17, p=0.003). There was no difference in mean PHAT score between groups at 1 year follow-up (80 +/- 19 vs 80 +/- 17, p=0.97). Mean PHAT score improved by 47 (95% CI 39 to 55, p<0.001) after operative and 34 (95% CI 27 to 41, p<0.001) after non-operative treatment. There were no relevant differences in secondary clinical outcome measures. Proximal continuity on MRI was present in 20 (95%, 1 recurrence) operative and 14 (52%, no recurrences) non-operative patients (p=0.008). Conclusion In a shared decision-making model of care, both operative and non-operative treatment of proximal hamstring tendon avulsions resulted in comparable clinical outcome at 1-year follow-up. Operative patients had lower pretreatment PHAT scores but improved substantially to reach comparable PHAT scores as non-operative patients. We recommend using this shared decision model of care until evidence-based indications in favour of either treatment option are available from high-level clinical trials.
引用
收藏
页码:340 / +
页数:10
相关论文
共 30 条
  • [1] Functional impairment after successful surgical reconstruction for proximal hamstring avulsion
    Best, Raymond
    Eberle, Julia
    Beck, Florian
    Beckmann, Johannes
    Becker, Ulrich
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL ORTHOPAEDICS, 2019, 43 (10) : 2341 - 2347
  • [2] Proximal hamstring tendon avulsion surgery: evaluation of the Perth Hamstring Assessment Tool
    Blakeney, William G.
    Zilko, Simon R.
    Edmonston, Steven J.
    Schupp, Natalie E.
    Annear, Peter T.
    [J]. KNEE SURGERY SPORTS TRAUMATOLOGY ARTHROSCOPY, 2017, 25 (06) : 1936 - 1942
  • [3] Outcomes After Operative and Nonoperative Treatment of Proximal Hamstring Avulsions A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
    Bodendorfer, Blake M.
    Curley, Andrew J.
    Kotler, Joshua A.
    Ryan, James M.
    Jejurikar, Neha S.
    Kumar, Anagha
    Postma, William F.
    [J]. AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SPORTS MEDICINE, 2018, 46 (11) : 2798 - 2808
  • [4] Buckwalter J., 2017, J ISAKOS, V2, P31, DOI DOI 10.1136/JISAKOS-2016-000105
  • [5] Clinical and Magnetic Resonance Imaging Outcomes After Surgical Repair of Complete Proximal Hamstring Ruptures Does the Tendon Heal?
    Chahal, Jaskarndip
    Bush-Joseph, Charles A.
    Chow, Alex
    Zelazny, Anthony
    Mather, Richard C., III
    Lin, Emery C.
    Gupta, Deepti
    Verma, Nikhil N.
    [J]. AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SPORTS MEDICINE, 2012, 40 (10) : 2325 - 2330
  • [6] Functional Results and Outcomes After Repair of Proximal Hamstring Avulsions
    Cohen, Steven B.
    Rangavajjula, Ashwin
    Vyas, Dharmesh
    Bradley, James P.
    [J]. AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SPORTS MEDICINE, 2012, 40 (09) : 2092 - 2098
  • [7] Shared Decision Making: A Model for Clinical Practice
    Elwyn, Glyn
    Frosch, Dominick
    Thomson, Richard
    Joseph-Williams, Natalie
    Lloyd, Amy
    Kinnersley, Paul
    Cording, Emma
    Tomson, Dave
    Dodd, Carole
    Rollnick, Stephen
    Edwards, Adrian
    Barry, Michael
    [J]. JOURNAL OF GENERAL INTERNAL MEDICINE, 2012, 27 (10) : 1361 - 1367
  • [8] Treatment of Proximal Hamstring Ruptures - A Systematic Review
    Harris, J. D.
    Griesser, M. J.
    Best, T. M.
    Ellis, T. J.
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SPORTS MEDICINE, 2011, 32 (07) : 490 - 495
  • [9] Decision Aids for Patients Facing a Surgical Treatment Decision A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
    Knops, Anouk M.
    Legemate, Dink A.
    Goossens, Astrid
    Bossuyt, Patrick M. M.
    Ubbink, Dirk T.
    [J]. ANNALS OF SURGERY, 2013, 257 (05) : 860 - 866
  • [10] Returning to sports after surgical repair of acute proximal hamstring ruptures
    Lefevre, N.
    Bohu, Y.
    Naouri, J. F.
    Klouche, S.
    Herman, S.
    [J]. KNEE SURGERY SPORTS TRAUMATOLOGY ARTHROSCOPY, 2013, 21 (03) : 534 - 539