Achilles Tendons Hypertrophy in Response to High Loading Training

Milgrom, Yael; Milgrom, Charles; Altaras, Talya; Globus, Opher; Zeltzer, Ehud; Finestone, Aharon S.

doi:10.1177/1071100714550651

Cited by 29 publications

(23 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Previous studies indicated that different degrees of transducer pressure could affect the morphological properties of the AT (Brushoj et al 2006; Dudley-Javoroski et al 2010; Milgrom et al 2014). Milgrom and colleagues (2014) suggested that calculations of the AT hypertrophy are better performed by changes in the CSA rather than thickness. Our results showed that maximal probe pressure could alter (~6%) both AT CSA and thickness.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…First, we have to note that we used two different digitization methods for US and MRI image analysis. In the past, several US studies used manual tracing (Brushoj et al 2006; Dudley-Javoroski et al 2010; Intziegianni et al 2015), equation-based digitization (Milgrom et al 2014), or assumptions of the tendon shape (Kallinen and Suominen 1994) to assess the AT CSA. Moreover, MRI images were traced manually (Brushoj et al 2006) or automatically (Hansen et al 2003).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Based on previous studies (Brushoj et al 2006; Dudley-Javoroski et al 2010; Foure et al 2011; Intziegianni et al 2015; Kallinen and Suominen 1994; Kongsgaard et al 2005; Magnusson et al 2001; Milgrom et al 2014; Rosager et al 2002; Waugh et al 2012; Ying et al 2003), we conducted the CSA measurements at the level between the malleoli and additionally at a second more proximal position (Fig. 1).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging are not interchangeable to assess the Achilles tendon cross-sectional-area

2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeThe major aim of this study was to compare ultrasound (US) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) measurements of the Achilles tendon cross-sectional area (CSA). Further aims were to conduct reliability analyses and to assess the influence of transducer pressure on the tendon properties in US measurements.MethodsThe Achilles tendon CSA of 15 participants was assessed at two positions with US and MRI by use of a standardized protocol. Method comparison was performed by two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and paired t test. Reliability was assessed by coefficients of variation (CV), intraclass correlation (ICC2,2), standard error of measurement (SEM), and minimal detectable change (MDC95). A paired t test was performed to investigate the effect of probe pressure on tendon CSA and thickness.ResultsMean US measurements provided a ~5.5% smaller CSA compared to MRI measurements. Intra-rater reliability analyses of US demonstrated CV values of 1.5–4.9%, ICC of 0.89–0.97, SEM and MDC95 values of 0.22–0.77 mm2 and 0.61–2.16 mm2 for both raters, whereby CV values for intra-rater reliability of MRI ranged from 1.0 to 3.7%. Inter-rater reliability was lower for both modalities. Pressure applied on the transducer altered Achilles tendon CSA and thickness significantly (p < 0.05).ConclusionsOur findings show that US and MRI cannot be used interchangeably for Achilles tendon CSA assessments, however, each imaging modality separately is reliable to assess this property. Pressure applied on the transducer during US measurements causes alterations of the tendon’s morphology and should be avoided.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging are not interchangeable to assess the Achilles tendon cross-sectional-area

2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Each participant laid face downwards on a physiotherapy table with their ankle joint in a neutral position. A 46 mm 5-11 MHz linear ultrasound probe (model L745) was placed perpendicularly to the Achilles tendon, between the medial and lateral malleoli [21]. The medial-lateral and anteriorposterior dimensions were recorded, and the crosssectional area was calculated using the associated formula for an oval, i.e., Anterior-posterior * medial-lateral * π/4.…”

Section: Orthosesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Acute effects of different orthoses on lower extremity kinetics and kinematics during running; a musculoskeletal simulation analysis

Sinclair¹,

Ingram²,

Taylor³

et al. 2019

Acta Bioeng Biomech

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The current investigation aimed to examine the effects of different orthotic conditions on the biomechanical mechanisms linked to the aetiology of chronic pathologies using musculoskeletal simulation. Methods: 16 male and 20 females ran over an embedded force plate at 4.0 m/s, in five different conditions (medial, lateral, no-orthoses, semi-custom and off the shelf). Kinematics of the lower extremities were collected using an eight-camera motion capture system and lower extremity joint loading also explored using a musculoskeletal simulation approach. Differences between orthoses conditions were examined using 2  2 mixed ANOVA. Results: External instantaneous load rate was significantly reduced in the off the shelf orthoses (male = 1290.60 and female = 1567.10 N/kg/s), compared to the medial (male = 1480.45 and female = 1767.05 N/kg/s) and semi-custom (male = 1552.99 and female = 1704.37 N/kg/s) conditions. In addition, peak patellofemoral stress was significantly lower in the off the shelf orthoses (male = 68.55 and female = 94.91 KPa/kg) compared to the lateral condition (male = 70.49 and female = 103.22 KPa/kg). Finally, peak eversion angles were significantly attenuated in the medial orthoses (male =-6.61 and female =-7.72 deg) compared to the lateral (male =-9.61 and female =-10.32 deg), no-orthoses (male =-8.22 and female =-10.10 deg), semi-custom (male =-8.25 and female =-9.49 deg) and off the shelf (male =-7.54 and female =-8.85 deg) conditions. Conclusions: The current investigation shows that different orthotic devices/ configurations may provide distinct benefits in terms of their effectiveness in attenuating the biomechanical parameters linked to the aetiology of chronic running injuries.

show abstract

“…Olympic weightlifting trainings are known to bring about hypertrophy in lower limb muscles and tendons along with a higher level of stiffness (Kubo et al 2007(Kubo et al , İnce 2019. In addition, athletic activities provide a hypertrophic effect on ATT and cross-sectional area of elder and athletic individuals (Kallinen and Suominen 1994, Emerson et al 2010, Milgrom et al 2014). When we compare ATT measurements of athletes in Olympic weightlifting and sedentary individuals, we might say that long-term physical trainings cause a hypertrophic effect of AT of the athletes.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Ultrasonographic Measurements of the Achilles Tendon Thickness of Men and Women Athletes in Olympic Weightlifting

Tüfekçi¹,

Erdağı²

2019

JETS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives: The study aims to investigate the Achilles tendon thickness of men, women athletes in Olympic weightlifting and sedentary individuals.Methods: This research study was conducted on 4 groups, comprising of athletes in Olympic weightlifting (n= 25 men, n=25 women) and sedentary individuals (n=25 men, n=25 women), aged 18-19 years. Ultrasonography was performed on the Achilles tendon of the two limbs of 100 individuals. Results: The mean thickness of the Achilles tendon was significantly larger in the athletes than in the sedentary individuals. No correlation was found between the age, height, body weight of the athletes and the thickness of the Achilles tendon.Conclusion: In conclusion, we state that in addition to the following hypertrophic development of the Achilles tendon in athletes in weightlifting, future studies including force parameters may be beneficial.

show abstract

Achilles Tendons Hypertrophy in Response to High Loading Training

Abstract: Level II, etiology study.

Cited by 29 publications

References 25 publications

Ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging are not interchangeable to assess the Achilles tendon cross-sectional-area

Ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging are not interchangeable to assess the Achilles tendon cross-sectional-area

Acute effects of different orthoses on lower extremity kinetics and kinematics during running; a musculoskeletal simulation analysis

Ultrasonographic Measurements of the Achilles Tendon Thickness of Men and Women Athletes in Olympic Weightlifting

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About