ReviewInternational orthopaedics2024
Injection therapy in professional footballers.
Review in International orthopaedics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Injury and local injection and the risk of foot/ankle osteoarthritis: a case-control study in retired UK male professional footballers.Rheumatology (Oxford, England) · 2026Article
- How to extract leucocyte-poor platelet-rich plasma using a commercial platelet concentration system developed to obtain leucocyte-rich platelet-rich plasma: A pilot study.Journal of experimental orthopaedics · 2026Article
- Sport-specific differences in ACL injury, treatment and return to sports: Football.Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA · 2025Review
- Therapeutic extracellular vesicles as a cornerstone of medicine in the next decade with gerontological focus.Biogerontology · 2025Review
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundInjection therapy offers a minimally invasive approach for symptomatic relief that allows concurrent training, limiting time loss and providing a faster recovery. However, there is a lack of scientific evidence to support it, and there are controversies about its use. The present narrative review aims to present the available scientific literature on injection therapies in professional footballers (PF), highlighting the advantages and disadvantages of its use in the most common injuries.
methodsThe authors searched and reviewed contemporary literature on injection therapies in PF in electronic databases, summarizing them in a narrative review.
resultsInjection therapies such as hyaluronic acid and PRP have shown an adequate safety profile that allows their use. Current evidence suggests that hyaluronic acid injections are a valid option for managing symptomatic cartilage injuries. At the same time, PRP injections have failed to prove beneficial in treating muscle injuries and should be avoided until further evidence proves the opposite. Yet, PRP may have potential use in partial ACL injuries, anterior inferior tibiofibular ligament injuries (ankle syndesmosis), and fifth metatarsal fractures and needs further study. Due to the long-term health repercussions, other injection therapies should be preferred over corticosteroids in PF.
conclusionsThere is a paucity of evidence on the use and benefits of injection therapies in PF despite its extensive use among physicians. Viscosupplementation may have a role in improving symptomatic cartilage injuries. In contrast, PRP injection therapy needs further high-quality clinical trials to assess its role in PF sports injuries.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39283321What 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.