Skip to main content
Log in

Functional impairment after successful surgical reconstruction for proximal hamstring avulsion

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
International Orthopaedics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

Surgical refixation procedures after hamstring avulsion injuries show satisfying to excellent outcome results. However, for post-operative evaluation so far, used outcome scores were partially not injury-specific, heterogeneous, difficult to compare, and possibly overestimated due to ceiling effects. A new injury-specific assessment tool has recently been published, potentially depicting more realistic outcome results. Thus, the aim of our study was to evaluate patients after hamstring refixation surgery using previously utilized as well as the new Perth hamstring assessment tool (PHAT).

Methods

A series of operated hamstring injuries were retrospectively evaluated using the PHAT as well as the widespread, customized Lower Extremity Functional Scale (C-LEFS) and the customized Marx score (C-Marx). Scores as well as potential ceiling effects were evaluated individually, and compared and correlated to each other.

Results

Sixty-four patients were enrolled into the survey. Forty-nine questionnaires (76%) could be evaluated. The mean total PHAT score (0–100) after 28 months (SD ± 17.0) was 74.1 (SD ± 22.5) points. Mean total C-LEFS (0–80) revealed 61.4 (SD ± 18.1) points, and the mean total C-Marx score (20) was 19.4 (SD ± 1.6) points. Pearson’s correlation between the individual questionnaires was high between the PHAT and the C-LEFS (r = 0.81) and low between the PHAT and C-Marx (r = 0.52) and between C-LEFS and C-Marx (r = 0.48).

Conclusion

The presented study confirms good subjective functional outcomes after surgical intervention of hamstring avulsions in all scores. Nevertheless, using the PHAT, residual complaints are more common than often described in previous studies interpreting “conventional” scores. For future decision and patient guidance, more studies using injury-specific assessments such as the PHAT in combination with objective measurements are eligible.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Cohen SB, Bradley JP (2007) Acute proximal hamstring rupture. J Am Acad Orthop Surg 15:350–355

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Harris JD, Griesser MJ, Best TM, Ellis TJ (2011) Treatment of proximal hamstring ruptures – a systematic review. Int J Sports Med 32:490–495

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Lempainen L, Banke I, Johasson BPU, Sarimo J, Orava S, Imhoff AB (2015) Clinical principles in the management of hamstring injuries. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 23:2449–2456

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Van der Made AD, Reuring G, Gouttebarge V, Tol JL, Kerkhoffs GM (2015) Outcome after surgical repair of proximal hamstring avulsions. Am J Sports Med 43(11):2841–2851

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Cohen SB, Rangavajjula A, Vyas D, Bradley JP (2012) Functional results and outcomes after repair of proximal hamstring avulsions. Am J Sports Med 40:2092–2098

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Rust DA, Giveans MR, Stone RM, Samuelson KM, Larson CM (2014) Functional outcomes and return to sports afetr acute repair, chronic repair, and allograft reconstruction for proximal hamstring ruptures. Am J Sports Med 42(6):1377–1383

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Blakeney WG, Zilko SR, Edmonston SJ, Schupp NE, Annear PT (2017) Proximal hamstring tendon avulsion surgery: evaluation of the Perth hamstring assessment tool. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 25(6):1936–1942

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Pombo M, Bradley JP (2009) Proximal hamstring avulsion injuries: a technique note on surgical repairs. Orthopaedics 1(3):261–264

    Google Scholar 

  9. Subbu R, Benjamin – Laing H, Haddad F (2015) Timing of surgery for complete proximal hamstring avulsion injuries: successful clinical outcomes at 6 weeks, 6 months, and after 6 months of injury. Am J Sports Med 43(2):385–391

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Bodendorfer B, Curley AJ, Kotler JA, Ryan JM, Jejurikar NS, Kumar Anagha BS, Postma WF (2017) Outcomes after operative and nonoperative treatment of proximal hamstring avulsions. Am J Sports Med Oct 1:363546517732526. https://doi.org/10.1177/0363546517732526

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Shambaugh BC, Olsen JR, Lacerte E, Kellum E, Miller SL (2017) Orthop J Sports Med 17(5):11 2325967117738551

    Google Scholar 

  12. Brucker PU, Imhoff AB (2005) Functional assessment after acute and chronic complete ruptures of the proximal hamstring tendons. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 13:411–418

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Bowman KF, Cohen SB, Bradley JP (2013) Operative management of partial-thickness tears of the proximal hamstring muscles in athletes. Am J Sport Med 41(6):1363–1371

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Birmingham P, Muller M, Wickiewicz T, Cacanaugh J, Rodeo S, Warren R (2011) Functional outcome after repair of proximal hamstring avulsions. J Boine Joint Surg (Am) 93(19):1819–1826

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Cahal J, Bush-Joseph CA, Chow A, Zelazny A, Mather RC 3rd, Lin EC, Gupta D, Verma NN (2012) Clinical and magnetic resonance imaging outcomes after surgical repair of complet proximal hamstring ruptures: does the tendon heal ? Am J Sports Med 40(10):2325–2330

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Konan S, Haddad F (2010) Successful return to high level sports following early surgical repair of complete tears of the proximal hamstring tendons. Int Orthop 34(1):119–123

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Sandmann GH, Hahn D, Amereller M, Siebenlist S, Schwirtz A, Imhoff AB, Brucker PU (2016) Mid-term functional outcome and return to sports after proximal hamstring tendon repair. Int J Sports Med 37:570–576

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Blakeney WG, Zilko SR, Edmonston SJ, Schupp NE, Annear PT (2017) A prospective evaluation of proximal hamstring tendon avulsions: improved functional outcomes following surgical repair. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2017 Jun;25(6):1943–1950

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Brucker PU, Imhoff AB (2004) Refixation of complete tendon ruptures of proximal ischio-crural muscles. Unfallchirurg 107(2):143–148

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Feucht MJ, Plath JE, Seppel G, Hinterwimmer S, Imhoff AB, Brucker PU (2014) Gross anatomical and dimensional characteristics oft he proximal hamstring origin. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc [epub ahead of print, published 15 June 2014]

  21. Binkley JM, Stratford PW, Lott SA, Riddle DL (1999) The lower extremity functional scale (LEFS): scale development, measurement properties and clinical application. Phys Ther 79:371–383

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Marx RG, Stump TJ, Jones EC, Wickiewicz TL, Warren RF (2001) Development and evaluation of an activity rating scale for disorders of the knee. Am J Sports Med 29:213–218

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Hinkle DE, Wiersma W, Jurs SG (2003) Applied statistics fort he behavioral sciences. Houghton Mifflin, Boston, pp 107–110

    Google Scholar 

  24. Skaara HE, Mosknes H, Frihagen F, Stuge B (2013) Self-reported and perfomrance-based functional outcomes after surgical repair of proximal hamstring avulsions. Am J Sports Med 41(11):2577–2584

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Raymond Best.

Ethics declarations

This retrospective survey does not contain any experimental studies on human participants or animals and thus meets all ethical standards described in the Declaration of Helsinki.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Best, R., Eberle, J., Beck, F. et al. Functional impairment after successful surgical reconstruction for proximal hamstring avulsion. International Orthopaedics (SICOT) 43, 2341–2347 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-018-4263-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-018-4263-6

Keywords

Navigation