ArticlePolish journal of radiology2025
Proposed modified classification system of the Munich Consensus Statement. Can the area of haemorrhagic effusion in muscle injuries be the dividing line between mild (3A) and moderate (3B) injuries?
Article in Polish journal of radiology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: Muscle injuries are common in competitive sports. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and ultrasound (US) are the most commonly used methods for evaluating muscle injuries. Several classification systems for muscle injuries have been published. Mueller-Wohlfahrt Material and methods: We conducted a comprehensive analysis of 100 MRI studies that were performed on high-level professional athletes who exhibited clinical signs of lower limb muscle injuries. We selected individuals whose myotendinous or myofascial lesions could be classified as 3A or 3B, based on the Mueller-Wohlfarth (MW) classification. The athletes were then categorised into groups based on the presence or absence of fluid collection at the site of injury. The study's medical practitioner provided data regarding the duration of the injury and the return to sporting activities. Regarding statistical analyses, a linear regression test was conducted to examine the correlation between the variable "fluid collections" and the duration of the injury. Following this, Fisher's Results: The results of the association between "blood collection" and "duration of injury" revealed a statistically significant correlation. The median value of return to play (RTP) in patients with haemorrhagic collection (median = 29) was significantly higher in comparison with patients without haemorrhagic collection (median = 19), with a difference between the 2 samples of 10 days. Conclusions: Our study highlights how this distinction could be easily practiced by recognizing the presence of a haemorrhagic collection and how it predominates in determining a worsening of the prognosis and therefore an extension of the RTP. Hence, we can conclude that athletes who do not have blood collection, but only interstitial haemorrhage between fibres can be considered as type 3A, while athletes with interstitial haemorrhage at diagnosis can be considered as type 3B.
Indexed as
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.