Skip to main content
Current Reviews in Musculoskeletal Medicine logoLink to Current Reviews in Musculoskeletal Medicine
. 2015 Apr 15;8(2):188–192. doi: 10.1007/s12178-015-9272-0

Surgical treatment for muscle injuries

Leonardo Addêo Ramos 1,2,, Rogério Teixeira de Carvalho 1,3, Rene Jorge Abdalla 1,4, Sheila Jean McNeill Ingham 1,4
PMCID: PMC4596178  PMID: 25877481

Abstract

Muscle injury causes functional impairment. The healing process takes time and fibrotic tissue can result. Recurrence and delayed recovery remain as unsolved problems. Surgical intervention can be a feasible alternative to avoid early and late complications associated with complete muscle tear in attempt to improve functional results. This article hopes to provide an update about surgical treatments for muscle tears in different scenarios.

Keywords: Muscle injury, Surgical treatment, Repair, Scaffold, Myositis ossificans, Compartmental syndrome

Introduction

Muscle injuries (MI) are common in sports, and their prevalence is high in many modalities like soccer [1], rugby [2], basketball [3] and track and field [4]. The mechanism of injury can be direct, indirect or combined trauma [2, 3] and can result in disability that will take time to heal. The correct diagnosis is based on clinical history, physical examination and imaging findings (ultrasonography, CT or MRI) [1], while a safe return to sports and activities requires a specialized team for an enhanced recovery [4].

A judicious interpretation of all these elements is key to obtain a suitable approach. However, there is a myriad of classification systems with different terminologies that makes the accurate decision for a better MI treatment a difficult task [5]. Complications related with MI can occur: severe muscle haematoma, myositis ossificans and compartmental syndrome [1, 4, 5].

The majority of MIs can be adequately managed with conservative treatments [6]. There is no consensus when a surgical approach for MI should be implemented. Nonetheless, few studies have mentioned the need for surgical intervention. The main surgical indications include a large intramuscular heamatoma(s), a complete (III degree) strain or tear of a muscle with few or no agonist muscle or a partial (II degree) strain if more than half of the muscle belly is torn [7, 8]. Another situation can be taken into account, if there is a persistent pain for more than 4 months with functional impairment [9].

Muscle haematoma

The mechanism that causes a MI can occur after a direct trauma like an impact or contusion or indirectly following a stretch or a tear with muscle damage. In some situations after a MI, mainly in sports, a localized bleeding can form a haematoma [10]. There are two types of haematoma: intramuscular and intermuscular. The main differences are described in Table 1.

Table 1.

Types of muscle haematoma

Intramuscular Intermuscular
Fascia/muscle sheath Remains intact Torn
Bleeding Within the muscle Spread between muscle and fascia
Swelling Persistent and increases beyond 48 h Pronounced within few hours
Symptoms Localized at the site of injury Diffuse and distal the injured area
Discoloration Appears few days after injury Marked within few hours

The prognosis for intermuscular haematomas is better than that of the intramuscular type. Poor prognosis indicators include increase and fluctuating swelling after 24 h, persistent swelling after 48–72 h, increased pain intensity, extension of tenderness from the site of injury, prolonged restricted limb range of motion caused by pain or muscle weakness and, potentially, diminished distal pulses or numbness and paraesthesia below the injury [10].

An overlooked muscle haematoma type, spontaneous, can occur in some scenarios. Risk factors that could contribute to haematoma formation need to be investigated: anticoagulation therapy (especially in the elderly); intense non-contact exercise, haemophilia, hypertension and following total hip arthroplasty [1113]. The iliopsoas muscle is the most affected followed by the rectus sheath. Differential diagnosis with abdominal and gynaecological diseases should be remembered to avoid misdiagnosis [14].

Surgical haematoma drainage should be indicated when nerve and/or vascular compression is detected based on clinical signs and symptoms corroborated with subsidiary exam findings and when haematoma infection is clinically relevant. There is no gold standard rule to make a decision to bespeak surgery.

Muscle repair

Muscle repair can be advocated for partial or complete tears in the muscle belly when more than half of its volume is compromised associated with functional disability [7, 8]. However, the breakable muscle damaged tissue makes the repair technically challenging. This biological component does not allow us to achieve a mechanically strong end-to-end repair with an appropriate tension that would provide a beneficial environment to achieve an effective healing with a sutured contractile muscle tissue [9]. In attempt to minimize problems with surgeries for muscle repair and improve healing with a viable contractile muscle formation, the employment of scaffolds has been proposed as a biological augmentation for muscle repair. There are a plenty of suture techniques, mostly described for tenorrhaphy procedures: Kessler grasping suture, modified Kessler grasping, Mason-Allen suture, Chinese finger trap, horizontal, in “8”, Bunnell suture, Nicoladoni technique and a combination of sutures [1520] There is no consensus about which suture technique is the best. Aarimaa et al. (2004) showed, in an experimental study, that volumetric muscle loss greater than 20 % cannot be biologically repaired and, consequently, result in a loss of function [21]. Thereby, a complete muscle tear with loss of function, like a laceration, remains a challenge for a conservative treatment because it can bring about functional disability and muscle weakness [22]. Oliva et al. reported a case of a patient that underwent a muscle repair with common separated stitches in the quadriceps muscle, including the epimysium, with satisfactory functional recovery after functional tests and complementary imaging exams at a 6-year follow-up [16]. It has been noticed that the best muscle repair should enclose endomysium, epimysium and also perimysium. This way, combined sutures with Kessler stitches and Mason-Allen techniques provide a better repair with high-resistance tension forces in comparison with common separated stitches. He at al demonstrated, in an experiment with rabbits, that there is no difference between Mason-Allen and Kessler sutures related to maximal axial load. However, in the Mason-Allen technique, the failure point was near the sutures, whereas in the Kessler suture, the fibres breached longitudinally. Because of this, the best option to promote a firm muscle suture should be with combined different sutures [18, 23].

Scaffolds

The scaffolds keep the tridimensional pattern and composition of the original tissue and help to enhance muscle regeneration. These scaffolds can be acquired from different biological tissues like swine or bovine dermal tissue, mucous or pericardium. There are, in the American health market, nine scaffolds brands in commercialization, being that 06 derived from swine tissue, hereof 03 derived from non-cross-linked small intestinal submucosa, 01 cross-linked hydrated small intestinal submucosa and 02 cross-linked hydrated dermal. There are three other products derived from bovine tissue, being that 02 are non-cross-linked dermal tissue and 01 is a cross-linked pericardial tissue [24, 25••]. The biological scaffolds are efficient as they modify the tissue repair mechanism, produce less fibrotic tissue and more muscle tissue can be synthetized [24]. This is possible due to the scaffold’s ability in altering the macrophages phenotypic delivery causing an increased release of tissue growth factors and promoting chemotaxis, from degraded tissue, attracting viable contractile tissue that enables tissue healing. Tissue differentiation into viable myoblasts, in the presence of a biological scaffold, is possible due to the presence of macrophages with a M1 pro-inflammatory phenotypic differentiation (macrophages derived from monocytes that enter the injured tissue). M1 macrophages enhance tissue proliferation, stem cell and satellite cell migration. The M1 maturation process is only possible due to the presence of M2 macrophages. Studies have investigated macrophages function during the tissue repair process, and the question about anti-inflammatory drugs prescription in the early treatment after muscle injuries and its effect on the macrophages remains unsolved [21, 25••, 26, 24, 27].

It is desirable to have an adequate micro-environment for cell development as well as the presence of growth factors to optimize muscle tissue strength during the healing process. Growth factors help to modulate the myogenesis guiding tissue proliferation and differentiation. Some cells have the capability to produce growth factors that are activated by the presence of the biological scaffolds. These scaffolds activate latent growth factors, mainly the fibroblast growth factor (bFGF) and the vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) that are essential to angiogenesis and tissue repair [20]. Turner et al., in 2010, evaluated dogs that underwent a gastrocnemius muscle resection that was posteriorly imbedded with scaffolds. After 6 months, the resultant muscle presented with 48 % of muscle strength in comparison to the contralateral gastrocnemius, innervation and vascularization were similar to the original tissue. Scaffold use, for muscle tears, represents a promising treatment alternative for cases with volumetric loss. These scaffolds are able to increase migration and proliferation of progenitor cells in the damaged area [28].

Other studies have tried to elucidate which factors are related with tissue integration and mechanisms evolved to enhance the formation of the best viable and functional tissue. Scaffolds cultivated with stem cells can regenerate the damaged muscle and can be a good option to improve performance after a muscle injury [29]. However, even if the scaffolds are used with no cells, it is possible to restore muscle function. Valentin et al. (2010) demonstrated that acellular scaffolds were able to grow a tissue with 80 % functionally in comparison with the original tissue, after 6 months. Sometimes, these repaired healed tissues from scaffolds, even without stem cells implantation, can achieve a similar tissue with good vascularization and innervation [25••, 27].

The biological solution for muscle injury treatment will be one possible option to develop better function. It is necessary to ameliorate scaffolds that optimize tissue repair and growth factor delivery associated with improvement in suture techniques that upgrade the final viable tissue, with less fibrosis and with mechanical strength near the normal muscle.

Myositis ossificans

Myositis ossificans (MO) is a serious and relatively common complication after MI (Fig. 1). It is related to trauma from a single blow or repeated episodes of micro-traumas [30]. It can be diagnosed and monitored by serial X-rays, being radiologically evident 3–6 weeks after injury [31]. Common symptoms are tenderness, swelling, loss of motion and hardening of the tissue perceived by muscle palpation [32]. The erythrocyte sedimentation rate and white blood cell count may be elevated. The alkaline phosphatase can be helpful to establish the degree of different stages of maturation in MO. The most common reported sites of MO are in the thigh and arm muscles: quadriceps femoris, brachialis and the adductor muscles of the thigh [31, 32]. Other factors associated with MO are severe recurrent contusion or trauma resulting in haemorrhage or tissue necrosis, after hamstring graft harvest for knee surgery, after stress fracture in the foot [3335]. In the majority of cases, it is asymptomatic and can be managed with non-operative treatments with spontaneous resolution monitored by imaging exams. Biphosphonate therapy with oral medication, which has potent anti-osteoclastic effects, can be prescribed in the acute phase with favourable outcomes [36]. If MO progress to permanently limit range of motion and function with pain or when the lesion is vulnerable to a repeated trauma causing disability, surgical intervention to remove persistent calcium deposits can be pointed out. Surgery should not be attempted until 4–6 months after trauma to allow for complete maturation of the process. When early open intervention is performed prior to maturation, recurrences are more likely to occur [32, 33].

Fig. 1.

Fig. 1

3D CT showing myositis ossificans in the quadriceps

Compartment syndrome

Compartment syndrome (CS) results from elevation of pressure within a compartment and impaired tissue perfusion. Acute CS can be caused after a direct blow, crush injury, burns, penetrating trauma and haematoma after a muscle tear [37]. Male gender and age less than 35 years have also been shown to be risk factors [38]. Other factors should be investigated and can be associated with CS like prolonged exercises, some medicaments (anabolic steroids, simvastatin, gabapentin), diabetes mellitus, impaired mental status and neuropathies [3941]. The most common areas affected are leg, thigh and forearm.

The most common symptom is a pain disproportionate to the injury, often associated with neurological abnormality [42]. Elevated intracompartmental pressure, obtained from a dynamic pressure measurement, is widely recognized as the most objective diagnostic parameter for CS. Whitesides et al. identified the pressure perfusion gradient at which ischemia is imminent and prophylactic fasciotomy should be done as <20 mmHg below the diastolic blood pressure [42]. Later, a pressure of 30 mmHg was suggested as an absolute threshold for the diagnosis of compartment syndrome [43]. Other methods to evaluate muscle oxygenation and CS can be used like near infra-red spectroscopy; intramuscular glucose concentration and partial pressure of oxygen rapidly help to identify muscle ischemia [44, 45•]. Early diagnosis is determinant for a good prognosis. Surgical intervention with open fasciotomy is mandatory when CS is confirmed [42]. It is crucial to identify all compartments involved to avoid incomplete or delayed fasciotomies that are associated with muscle necrosis and death [4648]. If rhabdomyolysis occurs, haemodialysis should be considered when life-threatening hyperkalaemia and metabolic acidosis exist [49].

Conclusions

Surgical treatment for muscle injuries depends on several factors. Improvements in surgical suture techniques have evolved for muscle repair. Cell-based therapy with scaffolds has been shown as a viable option for a better functional recovery. Surgical intervention for myositis ossificans should be delayed if functional disability remains unresolved. Haematoma drainage and fasciotomy can be required, when symptomatic nerve and/or vascular compression inside the compartment is detected.

Compliance with Ethics Guidelines

Conflict of Interest

Leonardo Addêo Ramos, Rogério Teixeira de Carvalho, Rene Jorge Abdalla, and Sheila Jean McNeill Ingham declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Human and Animal Rights and Informed Consent

This article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects performed by any of the authors.

Footnotes

This article is part of the Topical Collection on Muscle Injuries

References

Papers of particular interest, published recently, have been highlighted as: • Of importance •• Of major importance

  • 1.Ekstrand J, Hagglund M, Walden M. Epidemiology of muscle injuries in professional football (soccer) Am J Sports Med. 2011;39:1226–32. doi: 10.1177/0363546510395879. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Lopez V, Jr, Galano GJ, Black CM, Gupta AT, James DE, Kelleher KM, et al. Profile of an American amateur rugby union seven series. Am J Sports Med. 2012;40:179–84. doi: 10.1177/0363546511427124. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Borowski LA, Yard EE, Fields SK, Comstock RD. The epidemiology of US high school basketball injuries, 2005–2007. Am J Sports Med. 2008;36:2328–35. doi: 10.1177/0363546508322893. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Jacobsson J, Timpka T, Kowalski J, Nilsson S, Ekberg J, Renström P. Prevalence of musculoskeletal injuries in Swedish elite track and field athletes. Am J Sports Med. 2012;40:163–9. doi: 10.1177/0363546511425467. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Mueller-Wohlfahrt HW, Haensel L, Mithoefer K, Ekstrand J, English B, McNally S, et al. Terminology and classification of muscle injuries in sport: the Munich consensus statement. Br J Sports Med. 2013;47:342–50. doi: 10.1136/bjsports-2012-091448. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Beiner JM, Jokl P. Muscle contusion injuries: current treatment options. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2001;9:227–37. doi: 10.5435/00124635-200107000-00002. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Almekinders LC. Results of surgical repair versus splinting of experimentally transected muscle. J Orthop Trauma. 1991;5:173–6. doi: 10.1097/00005131-199105020-00009. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Kujala UM, Orava S, Järvinen M. Hamstring injuries: current trends in treatment and prevention. Sports Med. 1997;23:397–404. doi: 10.2165/00007256-199723060-00005. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Järvinen TA, Järvinen TL, Kääriäinen M, Kalimo H, Järvinen M. Muscle injuries: biology and treatment. Am J Sports Med. 2005;33(5):745–64. doi: 10.1177/0363546505274714. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Klein JH. Muscular hematomas: diagnosis and management. J Manipulative Physiol Ther. 1990;13:96–100. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Palatucci V, Lombardi G, Lombardi L, Giglio F, Giordano F, Lombardi D. Spontaneous muscle haematomas: management of 10 cases. Transl Med UniSa. 2014;10:13–7. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Dauty M, Sigaud M, Trossaërt M, Fressinaud E, Letenneur J, Dubois C. Iliopsoas hematoma in patients with hemophilia: a single-center study. Joint Bone Spine. 2007;74(2):179–83. doi: 10.1016/j.jbspin.2006.05.014. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Bartelt RB, Sierra RJ. Recurrent hematomas within the iliopsoas muscle caused by impingement after total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 2011;26(4):665.e1-5. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2010.04.002. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Oh JH, Kim TH, Cha SJ, Kim SH. Rectus sheath hematoma caused by non-contact strenuous exercise mimicking acute appendicitis. J Emerg Med. 2010;39(3):e117–9. doi: 10.1016/j.jemermed.2007.10.088. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Kragh JF, Jr, Basamania CJ. Surgical repair of acute traumatic closed transection of the biceps brachii. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2002;84-A:992–8. doi: 10.2106/00004623-200206000-00014. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Oliva F, Via AG, Kiritsi O, Foti C, Maffulli N. Surgical repair of muscle laceration: biomechanical properties at 6 years follow-up. Muscles Ligaments Tendons J. 2014;3(4):313–7. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Heckman JD, Levine MI. Traumatic closed transection of the biceps brachii in the military parachutist. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1978;60:369–72. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Kragh JF, Jr, Svoboda SJ, Wenke JC, Ward JA, Walters TJ. Epimysium and perimysium in suturing in skeletal muscle lacerations. J Trauma. 2005;59:209–12. doi: 10.1097/01.TA.0000171530.11588.70. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Kragh JF, Jr, Svoboda SJ, Wenke JC, Ward JA, Walters TJ. Suturing of lacerations of skeletal muscle. J Bone Joint Surg (Br) 2005;87:1303–5. doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.87B9.15728. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Menetrey J, Kasemkijwattana C, Fu FH, Moreland MS, Huard J. Suturing versus immobilization of a muscle laceration. A morphological and functional study in a mouse model. Am J Sports Med. 1999;27:222–9. doi: 10.1177/03635465990270021801. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Aarimaa V, Kaariainen M, Vaittinen S, et al. Restoration of myofiber continuity after transection injury in the rat soleus. Neuromuscul Disord. 2004;14:421–8. doi: 10.1016/j.nmd.2004.03.009. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Julien TP, Mudgal CS. Anchor suture technique for muscle belly repair. Tech Hand Up Extreme Surg. 2011;15:257–9. doi: 10.1097/BTH.0b013e318220e75a. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23.He M, Sebastin SJ, Gan AW, Lim AY, Chong AK. Biomechanical comparison of different suturing techniques in rabbit medial gastrocnemius muscle laceration repair. Ann Plast Surg. 2014;73(3):333–5. doi: 10.1097/SAP.0b013e31827ae9b0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Badylak SF, Brown BN, Gilbert TW, Daly KA, Huber A, Turner NJ. Biologic scaffolds for constructive tissue remodeling. Biomaterials. 2011;32:316–9. doi: 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2010.09.018. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25.••.Turner NJ, Badylak SF. Biologic scaffolds for musculotendinous tissue repair. Eur Cell Mater. 2013;25:130–43. doi: 10.22203/ecm.v025a09. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Ariganello MB, Simionescu DT, Labow RS, Lee JM. Macrophage differentiation and polarization on a decellularized pericardial biomaterial. Biomaterials. 2011;32:439–49. doi: 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2010.09.004. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Valentin JE, Turner NJ, Gilbert TW, Badylak SF. Functional skeletal muscle formation with a biologic scaffold. Biomaterials. 2010;31:7475–84. doi: 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2010.06.039. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28.Turner NJ, Yates AJ, Jr, Weber DJ, et al. Xenogeneic extracellular matrix as an inductive scaffold for regeneration of a functioning musculotendinous junction. Tissue Eng Part A. 2010;16:3309–17. doi: 10.1089/ten.tea.2010.0169. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29.Merritt EK, Cannon MV, Hammers DW, et al. Repair of traumatic skeletal muscle injury with bone-marrow-derived mesenchymal stem cells seeded on extracellular matrix. Tissue Eng Part A. 2010;16:2871–81. doi: 10.1089/ten.tea.2009.0826. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Parikh J, Hyare H, Saifuddin A. The imaging features of post-traumatic myositis ossificans, with emphasis on MRI. Clin Radiol. 2002;57:1058–66. doi: 10.1053/crad.2002.1120. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31.Renstrom P. Muscle injuries. In: Ekstrand J, Karlsson J, Hodson A, editors. Football medicine. London: Martin Dunitz; 2003. pp. 217–28. [Google Scholar]
  • 32.Larson CM, Almekinders LC, Karas SG, Garrett WE. Evaluating and managing muscle contusions and myositis ossificans. Phys Sports Med. 2002;30:41–50. doi: 10.3810/psm.2002.02.174. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 33.Miller AE, Davis BA, Beckley OA. Bilateral and recurrent myositis ossificans in an athlete: a case report and review of treatment options. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2006;87:286–90. doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2005.09.002. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 34.Davies JF, Chandramohan M, Groves C, Grogan RJ, Bollen S. Myositis ossificans as a complication of hamstring autograft harvest for open primary anterior and posterior cruciate ligament and posterolateral corner reconstruction. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2011;19:108–11. doi: 10.1007/s00167-010-1184-3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 35.De Maeseneer M, Jaovisidha S, Lenchik L, Vaughan LM, Russack V, Sartoris DJ, et al. Myositis ossificans of the foot. J Foot Ankle Surg. 1997;36(4):290–3. doi: 10.1016/S1067-2516(97)80075-0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 36.Ben Hamida KS, Hajri R, Kedadi H, Bouhaouala H, Salah MH, Mestiri A, et al. Myositis ossificans circumscripta of the knee improved by alendronate. Joint Bone Spine. 2004;71(2):144–6. doi: 10.1016/S1297-319X(03)00096-4. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 37.McQueen MM, Gaston P, Court-Brown CM. Acute compartment syndrome. Who is at risk? J Bone Joint Surg (Br) 2000;82(2):200–3. doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.82B2.9799. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 38.Hope MJ, McQueen MM. Acute compartment syndrome in the absence of fracture. J Orthop Trauma. 2004;4:220–4. doi: 10.1097/00005131-200404000-00005. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 39.Erturan G, Davies N, Williams H, Deo S. Bilateral simultaneous traumatic upper arm compartment syndromes associated with anabolic steroids. J Emerg Med. 2013;44(1):89–91. doi: 10.1016/j.jemermed.2011.06.015. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 40.Ramdass MJ, Singh G, Andrews B. Simvastatin-induced bilateral leg compartment syndrome and myonecrosis associated with hypothyroidism. Postgrad Med J. 2007;83(977):152–3. doi: 10.1136/pgmj.2006.051334. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 41.Tuccori M, Lombardo G, Lapi F, Vannacci A, Blandizzi C, Del Tacca M. Gabapentin-induced severe myopathy. Ann Pharmacother. 2007;41(7):1301–5. doi: 10.1345/aph.1K077. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 42.Whitesides TE, Haney TC, Morimoto K, Harada H. Tissue pressure measurements as a determinant for the need of fasciotomy. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1975;113:43–51. doi: 10.1097/00003086-197511000-00007. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 43.Hargens AR, Schmidt DA, Evans KL, Gonsalves MR, Cologne JB, Garfin SR, et al. Quantitation of skeletal-muscle necrosis in a model compartment syndrome. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1981;63:631–6. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 44.Shuler MS, Reisman WM, Kinsey TL, Whitesides TE, Jr, Hammerberg EM, Davila MG, et al. Correlation between muscle oxygenation and compartment pressures in acute compartment syndrome of the leg. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2010;92(4):863–70. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.I.00816. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 45.•.Doro CJ, Sitzman TJ, O’Toole RV. Can intramuscular glucose levels diagnose compartment syndrome? J Trauma Acute Care Surg. 2014;76(2):474–8. doi: 10.1097/TA.0b013e3182a9ccd1. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 46.Minnema BJ, Neligan PC, Quraishi NA, Fehlings MG, Prakash S. A case of occult compartment syndrome and nonresolving rhabdomyolysis. J Gen Intern Med. 2008;23(6):871–4. doi: 10.1007/s11606-008-0569-1. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 47.Ritenour AE, Dorlac WC, Fang R, Woods T, Jenkins DH, Flaherty SF, et al. Complications after fasciotomy revision and delayed compartment release in combat patients. J Trauma. 2008;64(2 Suppl):S153-6.1. doi: 10.1097/TA.0b013e3181607750. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 48.Jafferbhoy SF, Rustum Q, Shiwani MH. Abdominal compartment syndrome-a fatal complication from a rectus sheath haematoma. BMJ Case Rep. 2012. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • 49.Keltz E, Khan FY, Mann G. Rhabdomyolysis. The role of diagnostic and prognostic factors. Muscles Ligaments Tendons J. 2014;3(4):303–12. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Current Reviews in Musculoskeletal Medicine are provided here courtesy of Humana Press

RESOURCES