Biceps Femoris Aponeurosis Size: A Potential Risk Factor for Strain Injury?
PURPOSEA disproportionately small biceps femoris long head (BFlh) proximal aponeurosis has been suggested as a risk factor for hamstring strain injury by concentrating mechanical strain on the surrounding muscle tissue. However, the size of the BFlh aponeurosis relative to BFlh muscle size, or overa...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Medicine and science in sports and exercise 2015-07, Vol.47 (7), p.1383-1389 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 1389 |
---|---|
container_issue | 7 |
container_start_page | 1383 |
container_title | Medicine and science in sports and exercise |
container_volume | 47 |
creator | EVANGELIDIS, PAVLOS E MASSEY, GARRY J PAIN, MATTHEW T G FOLLAND, JONATHAN P |
description | PURPOSEA disproportionately small biceps femoris long head (BFlh) proximal aponeurosis has been suggested as a risk factor for hamstring strain injury by concentrating mechanical strain on the surrounding muscle tissue. However, the size of the BFlh aponeurosis relative to BFlh muscle size, or overall knee flexor strength, has not been investigated. This study aimed to examine the relationship of BFlh proximal aponeurosis area with muscle size (maximal anatomical cross-sectional area (ACSAmax)) and knee flexor strength (isometric and eccentric).
METHODSMagnetic resonance images of the dominant thigh of 30 healthy young males were analyzed to measure BFlh proximal aponeurosis area and muscle ACSAmax. Participants performed maximum voluntary contractions to assess knee flexion maximal isometric and eccentric torque (at 50° s and 350° s).
RESULTSBFlh proximal aponeurosis area varied considerably between participants (more than fourfold, range = 7.5–33.5 cm, mean = 20.4 ± 5.4 cm, coefficient of variation = 26.6%) and was not related to BFlh ACSAmax (r = 0.04, P = 0.83). Consequently, the aponeurosis/muscle area ratio (defined as BFlh proximal aponeurosis area divided by BFlh ACSAmax) exhibited sixfold variability, being 83% smaller in one individual than another (0.53 to 3.09, coefficient of variation = 32.5%). Moreover, aponeurosis size was not related to isometric (r = 0.28, P = 0.13) or eccentric knee flexion strength (r = 0.24, P ≥ 0.20).
CONCLUSIONBFlh proximal aponeurosis size exhibits high variability between healthy young men, and it was not related to BFlh muscle size or knee flexor strength. Individuals with a relatively small aponeurosis may be at increased risk of hamstring strain injury. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1249/MSS.0000000000000550 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1690212596</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>1690212596</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4260-4949c99b1a0f0b39a0e48ca4eb6269632150a2ac1a52c4ca74104b44b5bf33983</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kE1LAzEQhoMotlb_gUiOXrbmc7vxIrVYLVYUV88hG7M07X6Z7FLqrzfSKuLBgWHm8L7vMA8ApxgNMWHi4iFNh-h3cY72QB9ziiJEMd8HfYQFjwSmuAeOvF8GzYhSfAh6hFNKCUv64P7aatN4ODVl7ayH46auTOdqH_bUfphLOIZPdWuq1qoCPlu_glOl29rBPHTaOmUrOKuWndtcHYODXBXenOzmALxOb14md9H88XY2Gc8jzUiMIiaY0EJkWKEcZVQoZFiiFTNZTGIRU4I5UkRprDjRTKsRw4hljGU8yykVCR2A821u4-r3zvhWltZrUxSqMnXnJY4FIpjwkDUAbCvV4SXvTC4bZ0vlNhIj-YVRBozyL8ZgO9td6LLSvP2YvrkFQbIVrOuiNc6vim5tnFwYVbSL_7M_ASlKfKE</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1690212596</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Biceps Femoris Aponeurosis Size: A Potential Risk Factor for Strain Injury?</title><source>Ovid Lippincott Williams and Wilkins Journal Legacy Archive</source><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Journals@Ovid Complete</source><creator>EVANGELIDIS, PAVLOS E ; MASSEY, GARRY J ; PAIN, MATTHEW T G ; FOLLAND, JONATHAN P</creator><creatorcontrib>EVANGELIDIS, PAVLOS E ; MASSEY, GARRY J ; PAIN, MATTHEW T G ; FOLLAND, JONATHAN P</creatorcontrib><description>PURPOSEA disproportionately small biceps femoris long head (BFlh) proximal aponeurosis has been suggested as a risk factor for hamstring strain injury by concentrating mechanical strain on the surrounding muscle tissue. However, the size of the BFlh aponeurosis relative to BFlh muscle size, or overall knee flexor strength, has not been investigated. This study aimed to examine the relationship of BFlh proximal aponeurosis area with muscle size (maximal anatomical cross-sectional area (ACSAmax)) and knee flexor strength (isometric and eccentric).
METHODSMagnetic resonance images of the dominant thigh of 30 healthy young males were analyzed to measure BFlh proximal aponeurosis area and muscle ACSAmax. Participants performed maximum voluntary contractions to assess knee flexion maximal isometric and eccentric torque (at 50° s and 350° s).
RESULTSBFlh proximal aponeurosis area varied considerably between participants (more than fourfold, range = 7.5–33.5 cm, mean = 20.4 ± 5.4 cm, coefficient of variation = 26.6%) and was not related to BFlh ACSAmax (r = 0.04, P = 0.83). Consequently, the aponeurosis/muscle area ratio (defined as BFlh proximal aponeurosis area divided by BFlh ACSAmax) exhibited sixfold variability, being 83% smaller in one individual than another (0.53 to 3.09, coefficient of variation = 32.5%). Moreover, aponeurosis size was not related to isometric (r = 0.28, P = 0.13) or eccentric knee flexion strength (r = 0.24, P ≥ 0.20).
CONCLUSIONBFlh proximal aponeurosis size exhibits high variability between healthy young men, and it was not related to BFlh muscle size or knee flexor strength. Individuals with a relatively small aponeurosis may be at increased risk of hamstring strain injury.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0195-9131</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1530-0315</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1249/MSS.0000000000000550</identifier><identifier>PMID: 25333248</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: American College of Sports Medicine</publisher><subject>Humans ; Isometric Contraction - physiology ; Knee - physiology ; Magnetic Resonance Imaging ; Male ; Muscle Strength - physiology ; Muscle, Skeletal - anatomy & histology ; Muscle, Skeletal - physiology ; Risk Factors ; Sprains and Strains - physiopathology ; Thigh ; Young Adult</subject><ispartof>Medicine and science in sports and exercise, 2015-07, Vol.47 (7), p.1383-1389</ispartof><rights>2015 American College of Sports Medicine</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4260-4949c99b1a0f0b39a0e48ca4eb6269632150a2ac1a52c4ca74104b44b5bf33983</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4260-4949c99b1a0f0b39a0e48ca4eb6269632150a2ac1a52c4ca74104b44b5bf33983</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27924,27925</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25333248$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>EVANGELIDIS, PAVLOS E</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>MASSEY, GARRY J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>PAIN, MATTHEW T G</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>FOLLAND, JONATHAN P</creatorcontrib><title>Biceps Femoris Aponeurosis Size: A Potential Risk Factor for Strain Injury?</title><title>Medicine and science in sports and exercise</title><addtitle>Med Sci Sports Exerc</addtitle><description>PURPOSEA disproportionately small biceps femoris long head (BFlh) proximal aponeurosis has been suggested as a risk factor for hamstring strain injury by concentrating mechanical strain on the surrounding muscle tissue. However, the size of the BFlh aponeurosis relative to BFlh muscle size, or overall knee flexor strength, has not been investigated. This study aimed to examine the relationship of BFlh proximal aponeurosis area with muscle size (maximal anatomical cross-sectional area (ACSAmax)) and knee flexor strength (isometric and eccentric).
METHODSMagnetic resonance images of the dominant thigh of 30 healthy young males were analyzed to measure BFlh proximal aponeurosis area and muscle ACSAmax. Participants performed maximum voluntary contractions to assess knee flexion maximal isometric and eccentric torque (at 50° s and 350° s).
RESULTSBFlh proximal aponeurosis area varied considerably between participants (more than fourfold, range = 7.5–33.5 cm, mean = 20.4 ± 5.4 cm, coefficient of variation = 26.6%) and was not related to BFlh ACSAmax (r = 0.04, P = 0.83). Consequently, the aponeurosis/muscle area ratio (defined as BFlh proximal aponeurosis area divided by BFlh ACSAmax) exhibited sixfold variability, being 83% smaller in one individual than another (0.53 to 3.09, coefficient of variation = 32.5%). Moreover, aponeurosis size was not related to isometric (r = 0.28, P = 0.13) or eccentric knee flexion strength (r = 0.24, P ≥ 0.20).
CONCLUSIONBFlh proximal aponeurosis size exhibits high variability between healthy young men, and it was not related to BFlh muscle size or knee flexor strength. Individuals with a relatively small aponeurosis may be at increased risk of hamstring strain injury.</description><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Isometric Contraction - physiology</subject><subject>Knee - physiology</subject><subject>Magnetic Resonance Imaging</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Muscle Strength - physiology</subject><subject>Muscle, Skeletal - anatomy & histology</subject><subject>Muscle, Skeletal - physiology</subject><subject>Risk Factors</subject><subject>Sprains and Strains - physiopathology</subject><subject>Thigh</subject><subject>Young Adult</subject><issn>0195-9131</issn><issn>1530-0315</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2015</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kE1LAzEQhoMotlb_gUiOXrbmc7vxIrVYLVYUV88hG7M07X6Z7FLqrzfSKuLBgWHm8L7vMA8ApxgNMWHi4iFNh-h3cY72QB9ziiJEMd8HfYQFjwSmuAeOvF8GzYhSfAh6hFNKCUv64P7aatN4ODVl7ayH46auTOdqH_bUfphLOIZPdWuq1qoCPlu_glOl29rBPHTaOmUrOKuWndtcHYODXBXenOzmALxOb14md9H88XY2Gc8jzUiMIiaY0EJkWKEcZVQoZFiiFTNZTGIRU4I5UkRprDjRTKsRw4hljGU8yykVCR2A821u4-r3zvhWltZrUxSqMnXnJY4FIpjwkDUAbCvV4SXvTC4bZ0vlNhIj-YVRBozyL8ZgO9td6LLSvP2YvrkFQbIVrOuiNc6vim5tnFwYVbSL_7M_ASlKfKE</recordid><startdate>201507</startdate><enddate>201507</enddate><creator>EVANGELIDIS, PAVLOS E</creator><creator>MASSEY, GARRY J</creator><creator>PAIN, MATTHEW T G</creator><creator>FOLLAND, JONATHAN P</creator><general>American College of Sports Medicine</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>201507</creationdate><title>Biceps Femoris Aponeurosis Size: A Potential Risk Factor for Strain Injury?</title><author>EVANGELIDIS, PAVLOS E ; MASSEY, GARRY J ; PAIN, MATTHEW T G ; FOLLAND, JONATHAN P</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c4260-4949c99b1a0f0b39a0e48ca4eb6269632150a2ac1a52c4ca74104b44b5bf33983</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2015</creationdate><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Isometric Contraction - physiology</topic><topic>Knee - physiology</topic><topic>Magnetic Resonance Imaging</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Muscle Strength - physiology</topic><topic>Muscle, Skeletal - anatomy & histology</topic><topic>Muscle, Skeletal - physiology</topic><topic>Risk Factors</topic><topic>Sprains and Strains - physiopathology</topic><topic>Thigh</topic><topic>Young Adult</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>EVANGELIDIS, PAVLOS E</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>MASSEY, GARRY J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>PAIN, MATTHEW T G</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>FOLLAND, JONATHAN P</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Medicine and science in sports and exercise</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>EVANGELIDIS, PAVLOS E</au><au>MASSEY, GARRY J</au><au>PAIN, MATTHEW T G</au><au>FOLLAND, JONATHAN P</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Biceps Femoris Aponeurosis Size: A Potential Risk Factor for Strain Injury?</atitle><jtitle>Medicine and science in sports and exercise</jtitle><addtitle>Med Sci Sports Exerc</addtitle><date>2015-07</date><risdate>2015</risdate><volume>47</volume><issue>7</issue><spage>1383</spage><epage>1389</epage><pages>1383-1389</pages><issn>0195-9131</issn><eissn>1530-0315</eissn><abstract>PURPOSEA disproportionately small biceps femoris long head (BFlh) proximal aponeurosis has been suggested as a risk factor for hamstring strain injury by concentrating mechanical strain on the surrounding muscle tissue. However, the size of the BFlh aponeurosis relative to BFlh muscle size, or overall knee flexor strength, has not been investigated. This study aimed to examine the relationship of BFlh proximal aponeurosis area with muscle size (maximal anatomical cross-sectional area (ACSAmax)) and knee flexor strength (isometric and eccentric).
METHODSMagnetic resonance images of the dominant thigh of 30 healthy young males were analyzed to measure BFlh proximal aponeurosis area and muscle ACSAmax. Participants performed maximum voluntary contractions to assess knee flexion maximal isometric and eccentric torque (at 50° s and 350° s).
RESULTSBFlh proximal aponeurosis area varied considerably between participants (more than fourfold, range = 7.5–33.5 cm, mean = 20.4 ± 5.4 cm, coefficient of variation = 26.6%) and was not related to BFlh ACSAmax (r = 0.04, P = 0.83). Consequently, the aponeurosis/muscle area ratio (defined as BFlh proximal aponeurosis area divided by BFlh ACSAmax) exhibited sixfold variability, being 83% smaller in one individual than another (0.53 to 3.09, coefficient of variation = 32.5%). Moreover, aponeurosis size was not related to isometric (r = 0.28, P = 0.13) or eccentric knee flexion strength (r = 0.24, P ≥ 0.20).
CONCLUSIONBFlh proximal aponeurosis size exhibits high variability between healthy young men, and it was not related to BFlh muscle size or knee flexor strength. Individuals with a relatively small aponeurosis may be at increased risk of hamstring strain injury.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>American College of Sports Medicine</pub><pmid>25333248</pmid><doi>10.1249/MSS.0000000000000550</doi><tpages>7</tpages></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0195-9131 |
ispartof | Medicine and science in sports and exercise, 2015-07, Vol.47 (7), p.1383-1389 |
issn | 0195-9131 1530-0315 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1690212596 |
source | Ovid Lippincott Williams and Wilkins Journal Legacy Archive; MEDLINE; Journals@Ovid Complete |
subjects | Humans Isometric Contraction - physiology Knee - physiology Magnetic Resonance Imaging Male Muscle Strength - physiology Muscle, Skeletal - anatomy & histology Muscle, Skeletal - physiology Risk Factors Sprains and Strains - physiopathology Thigh Young Adult |
title | Biceps Femoris Aponeurosis Size: A Potential Risk Factor for Strain Injury? |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-28T10%3A20%3A52IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Biceps%20Femoris%20Aponeurosis%20Size:%20A%20Potential%20Risk%20Factor%20for%20Strain%20Injury?&rft.jtitle=Medicine%20and%20science%20in%20sports%20and%20exercise&rft.au=EVANGELIDIS,%20PAVLOS%20E&rft.date=2015-07&rft.volume=47&rft.issue=7&rft.spage=1383&rft.epage=1389&rft.pages=1383-1389&rft.issn=0195-9131&rft.eissn=1530-0315&rft_id=info:doi/10.1249/MSS.0000000000000550&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E1690212596%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1690212596&rft_id=info:pmid/25333248&rfr_iscdi=true |