OBJECTIVES:This study aims to compare the prevalence of osteoarthritis in two groups: one comprising former professional soccer players and the other comprising non-professional-athlete participants.METHODS:Twenty-seven male former professional soccer players and 30 male volunteers from different non-sports professional areas participated in the study. All participants underwent bilateral knee radiography and magnetic resonance imaging. In addition, the quality of life, knee pain and joint function were evaluated and compared using questionnaires given to all participants in both groups. Specific knee evaluations, with regard to osteoarthritis and quality of life, were performed in both groups using the Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score subjective questionnaires and the Short-form 36. The chi-squared test, Fisher's exact test, the Mann-Whitney U test and Student's t-test were used for group comparisons.RESULTS:The between-groups comparison revealed significant differences in the following: pain, symptoms and quality of life related to the knee in the Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score subscales; the physical aspects subscale of the SF-36; total whole-organ magnetic resonance imaging scores with regard to the dominant and non-dominant knees. Former soccer players had worse scores than the controls in all comparisons.CONCLUSIONS:Both the clinical and magnetic resonance evaluations and the group comparisons performed in this study revealed that former soccer players have a worse quality of life than that of a control group with regard to physical aspects related to the knee; these aspects include greater pain, increased symptoms and substantial changes in radiographic and magnetic resonance images of the knee.

Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and ultrasound are the imaging modalities of choice to assess muscle injuries in athletes. Most authors consider MRI as the reference standard for evaluation of muscle injuries, since it superiorly depicts the extent of injuries independently of its temporal evolution, and due to the fact that MRI seems to be more sensitive for the detection of minimal injuries. Furthermore, MRI may potentially allow sports medicine physicians to more accurately estimate recovery times of athletes sustaining muscle injuries in the lower limbs, as well as the risk of re-injury. However, based on data available, the specific utility of imaging (including MRI) regarding its prognostic value remains limited and controversial. Although high-quality imaging is systematically performed in professional athletes and data extracted from it may potentially help to plan and guide management of muscle injuries, clinical (and functional) assessment is still the most valuable tool to guide return to competition decisions.

Background: A few recent studies have evaluated diagnostic accuracy by comparison between clinical and autopsy diagnoses in a hospital specialising in cardiology. Methods: 406 consecutive autopsy cases during 2 years were studied. Patients were aged 47.4¡28.4 years; 236 (58.1%) were men and 170 (41.9%) women. Diagnostic comparison was categorised in classes I to V (I, II, III and IV: discrepancy in decreasing order of importance regarding therapy and prognosis; V: concordance). Categorisation was ranked on the basis of the highest degree of discrepancy. Statistical analysis was performed with the X 2 test and stepwise logistic regression. Results: Each age increase of 10 years added 16.2% to the risk of the diagnostic comparison to be categorised in classes I and II (major discrepancy) in comparison to classes III, IV and V (OR 1.16, 95% CI 1.07 to 1.27, p,0.001). By contrast, admission to intensive care units decreased the risk of categorisation in classes I and II by 47% (OR 0.53, 95% CI 0.32 to 0.85, p = 0.009). The most frequent diagnostic discrepancy occurred for pulmonary embolism: 30 out of 88 (34.1%) diagnoses in classes I and II. The concordance rate was 71.1% for acute myocardial infarction, 75% for aorta dissection, 73.1% for infective endocarditis and 35.2% for pulmonary embolism. Conclusion: Age and hospital ward influenced the distribution of diagnostic discrepancy or concordance between clinical and autopsy diagnoses. The lower discrepancy rate for myocardial infarction and infective endocarditis may be related to the fact that the study was carried out in a specialist hospital.

III.

Level II, prospective comparative study.