ArticleOrthopaedic journal of sports medicine2025
Inferior Pubic Ligament Injury: Magnetic Resonance Imaging Assessment in Athletes With Pubic-Related Groin Pain.
Article in Orthopaedic journal of sports medicine, 2025. 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.
- Osteitis Pubis in Athletes in the Era of Pubic-Related Groin Pain: Contemporary Concepts in Diagnosis, Rehabilitation, and Surgical Decision-Making.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
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
Background: Many athletes experience pubalgia. Although much is known about ligament injuries in other joints, the importance of ligament injuries in the pubic joint remains understudied. Purpose: To determine the frequency of an inferior pubic ligament (IPL) injury on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in a population of athletes with isolated pubic-related groin pain and to compare this group with a control group of athletes with adductor-related groin pain to assess the clinical relevance and association of an IPL injury with pubic-related groin pain. Study Design: Cross-sectional study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: Inclusion criteria consisted of athletes with pubic-related groin pain. All included participants were given a standardized questionnaire, a clinical examination, and a MRI examination of the pelvis. All MRI scans were reviewed to assess the IPL and other pubic-related pathologies, including pubic bone marrow edema and adductor injuries. The prevalence of an IPL lesion in patients with pubic-related groin pain is reported with the 95% confidence interval (95% CI). A control group with adductor-related groin pain was retrospectively included for comparison. Group characteristics were compared using the Pearson χ Results: A total of 60 athletes were included (56 male, 4 female); 18% showed definite MRI signs of IPL injury. In addition, 15% showed an equivocal IPL abnormality. This resulted in an IPL lesion prevalence of 33% (95% CI, 23%-46%) in this group. Of the 20 athletes with an IPL injury, 18 were soccer players and 2 were track and field athletes. All were men. The median age was 30 years (IQR, 26-36). The risk of IPL lesion was significantly higher in patients with trauma (odds ratio, 8.76; 95% CI, 2.56-29.91; Conclusion: On the basis of MRI analysis, there is a relatively high frequency of IPL injuries (33%) in athletes with pubic-related groin pain in addition to pubic bone and adductor pathology. No IPL injuries (0%) were observed in a control group of athletes with adductor-related groin pain. Our findings support the consideration of IPL injury in the diagnostic workup of pubic-related groin pain, particularly in posttraumatic cases. Further research is needed to refine the diagnostic process and to better understand the implications of IPL injury for rehabilitation and return-to-play outcomes.
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.