ArticleJB & JS open access
Measuring Intracompartmental Pressures in the Lower Leg: Assessing the Use of Unilateral Measurements in Patients with Bilateral Symptoms.
Article in JB & JS open access. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Regional oximetry for diagnosing compartment syndrome: a scoping review.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 6 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The purpose of the present study was to evaluate whether unilateral intracompartmental pressure (ICP) measurements correctly represent the contralateral ICP value in patients suspected to have bilateral chronic exertional compartment syndrome (CECS) in the anterior compartment of the leg. Methods: A retrospective cohort study was performed that included military service members who had been referred to a secondary care department for bilateral anterolateral exercise-related leg pain. The obtained ICP values were utilized to assess 2 possible measurement strategies to perform unilateral ICP measurements: the right-leg strategy (i.e., always testing the right leg) and the most-symptomatic-leg strategy (i.e., always testing the most symptomatic). The diagnostic cutoff value for CECS in this cohort was 35 mmHg in the first minute after provocation. Four outcome categories were created to describe the pressure classification of the second leg if only 1 leg would have been measured: correct (category 1: both values ≥35 mmHg; category 2: both values <35 mmHg) or incorrect (category 3: measured leg, ≥35 mmHg and contralateral leg, <35 mmHg; category 4: measured leg, <35 mmHg and contralateral leg, ≥35 mmHg). Results: A total of 442 patients (884 legs) were included. In 88% of patients, the unilateral value would have correctly diagnosed the other symptomatic leg, whereas in 12% of patients, the contralateral leg would have been diagnosed incorrectly. The right-leg strategy had a slightly smaller proportion of cases in which the contralateral leg would have been incorrectly diagnosed (7% compared with 8% for the most symptomatic leg strategy). In 89% of the 390 patients in categories 1 and 2, the ICP values deviated by >5 mmHg from the 35-mmHg cutoff value compared with 40% of the 52 patients in categories 3 and 4. Conclusions: In military service members with bilateral chronic anterolateral exertional pain, a unilateral ICP measurement seems to be justified, especially among those with pressure values >5 mmHg above or below the diagnostic cutoff value. When a unilateral pressure measurement is within 5 mmHg above or below the cutoff value, a bilateral ICP measurement may be warranted. Level of Evidence: Prognostic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.