Search

Background: Sacral stress fractures are a rare cause of low back pain in athletes. Given the low incidence of these fractures, there is a scarcity of data on symptomatology, risk factors, and clinical outcomes., Hypothesis: Patients diagnosed with sacral stress fractures would be athletes presenting with low back pain., Study Design: Case series of 13 patients with sacral stress fractures., Level of Evidence: Level 4., Methods: We conducted a retrospective review of medical records to identify patients diagnosed with sacral stress fractures at a single academic institution. Fractures were diagnosed on noncontrast T2-weighted magnetic resonance imaging scans and categorized using the Bakker classification system. Subjects were administered an electronic survey that asked about (1) the onset, time course, and location of pain and other symptoms; (2) time to treatment and treatment modalities pursued; (3) sports performance and time to return to sport; and (4) risk factors for stress fractures., Results: Of 18 eligible patients, 13 (72.2%) completed the survey with mean follow-up of 49.6 months (range, 1-144 months). Mean age was 28.0 years (range, 18-52 years); 9 patients (69.2%) were female, of whom 7 (77.8%) were premenopausal. The most common fracture type was Bakker type B (8 patients; 61.5%). Most patients presented with acute lumbosacral back pain in the setting of running/jogging activities. All patients underwent nonoperative treatment for an average of 3.8 months (range, 0-8 months) and three-quarters reported pain resolution at last follow-up. Rate of return to sport was 83.3%, but most patients reported ongoing deficits in running performance., Conclusion: Sacral stress fractures commonly present as acute lumbosacral back pain provoked by running sports. While the pain associated with these fractures prevents most athletes from participating in sports, nonoperative management appears to be an effective treatment modality with a high rate of return to sport., Competing Interests: The authors report no potential conflicts of interest in the development and publication of this article.

Background: Exertional compartment syndrome (ECS) is an underdiagnosed cause of lower extremity pain among athletes. The condition can be managed operatively by fasciotomy to relieve excess compartment pressure. However, symptom recurrence rates after fasciotomy are considerable, ranging from 3% to 17%., Hypothesis: Leg paresthesia and its distribution during ECS episodes would be a significant predictor of outcomes after fasciotomy., Study Design: Retrospective cohort study., Level of Evidence: Level 4., Methods: We conducted a retrospective chart review of patients who underwent fasciotomy for ECS at our center from 2010 to 2020 (institutional review board no. 21-00107). We measured postoperative outcomes including pain frequency and severity, Tegner activity level, and return to sport. Significant predictors of outcomes were identified using multivariable linear and logistic regression. P values <0.05 were considered significant., Results: A total of 78 legs (from 42 male and 36 female participants) were included in the study with average follow-up of 52 months (range, 3-126 months); 33 participants (42.3%) presented with paresthesia. Paresthesia was an independent predictor of worse outcomes, including more severe pain at rest ( P = 0.05) and with daily activity ( P = 0.04), reduced postoperative improvement in Tegner scores ( P = 0.04), and lower odds of return to sport ( P = 0.05). Those with paresthesia symptoms in the tibial nerve distribution had worse outcomes than those without paresthesia in terms of preoperative-to-present improvement in pain frequency ( P < 0.01), pain severity at rest ( P < 0.01) and with daily activity ( P = 0.04), and return to sport ( P = 0.04)., Conclusion: ECS patients who present with paresthesia have worse pain and activity outcomes after first-time fasciotomy, but prognosis is worst among those with tibial nerve paresthesia., Clinical Relevance: Paresthesia among ECS patients is broadly predictive of more severe recurrent leg pain, reduced activity level, and decreased odds of return to sport after fasciotomy., Competing Interests: The following author declared potential conflicts of interest: L.M.J. received grants or has pending grants from Arthrex, Mitek, and Smith & Nephew; and received publishing royalties from Wolters Kluwer Health - Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.

Context: With the ever-increasing number of masters athletes, it is necessary to understand how to best provide medical support to this expanding population using a multidisciplinary approach., Evidence Acquisition: Relevant articles published between 2000 and 2013 using the search terms masters athlete and aging and exercise were identified using MEDLINE., Study Design: Clinical review., Level of Evidence: Level 3., Results: Preparticipation screening should assess a variety of medical comorbidities, with emphasis on cardiovascular health in high-risk patients. The masters athlete should partake in moderate aerobic exercise and also incorporate resistance and flexibility training. A basic understanding of physiology and age-related changes in muscle composition and declines in performance are prerequisites for providing appropriate care. Osteoarthritis and joint arthroplasty are not contraindications to exercise, and analgesia has an appropriate role in the setting of acute or chronic injuries. Masters athletes should follow regular training regimens to maximize their potential while minimizing their likelihood of injuries., Conclusion: Overall, masters athletes represent a unique population and should be cared for utilizing a multidisciplinary approach. This care should be implemented not only during competitions but also between events when training and injury are more likely to occur., Strength of Recommendation Taxonomy Sort: B.

Context: Sidelines coverage presents unique challenges in the evaluation of injured athletes. Health care providers may be confronted with the question of when to obtain radiographs following an injury. Given that most sidelines coverage occurs outside the elite level, radiographs are not readily available at the time of injury, and the decision of when to send a player for radiographs must be made based on physical examination. Clinical tools have been developed to aid in identifying injuries that are likely to result in radiographically important fractures or dislocations., Evidence Acquisition: A search for the keywords x-ray and decision rule along with the anatomic locations shoulder, elbow, wrist, knee, and ankle was performed using the PubMed database. No limits were set regarding year of publication. We selected meta-analyses, randomized controlled trials, and survey results. Our selection focused on the largest, most well-studied published reports. We also attempted to include studies that reported the application of the rules to the field of sports medicine., Study Design: Retrospective literature review., Level of Evidence: Level 4., Results: The Ottawa Foot and Ankle Rules have been validated and implemented and are appropriate for use in both pediatric and adult populations. The Ottawa Knee Rules have been widely studied, validated, and accepted for evaluation of knee injuries. There are promising studies of decision rules for clinically important fractures of the wrist, but these studies have not been validated. The elbow has been evaluated with good outcomes via the elbow extension test, which has been validated in both single and multicenter studies. Currently, there are no reliable clinical decision tools for traumatic sports injuries to the shoulder to aid in the decision of when to obtain radiographs., Conclusion: Clinical decision tools have been developed to aid in the diagnosis and management of injuries commonly sustained during sporting events. Tools that have been appropriately validated in populations outside the initial study population can assist sports medicine physicians in the decision of when to get radiographs from the sidelines.