ReviewSkeletal radiology2026
Imaging in the diagnosis and characterization of tennis leg.
Review in Skeletal radiology, 2026. 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Tennis leg is a common cause of acute posteromedial calf pain and encompasses a spectrum of injuries involving the posterior calf. Although initially described as rupture of the plantaris tendon, clinical, surgical, and imaging evidence indicates that injury to the medial head of the gastrocnemius at the distal myotendinous junction is the most frequent cause. Less commonly, the lateral gastrocnemius, the soleus, or the plantaris may be affected. Clinical presentation is often nonspecific and overlaps with important alternative diagnoses, including Achilles tendon rupture, deep vein thrombosis, and ruptured Baker cyst, making imaging helpful for accurate diagnosis. Sonography (US) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) are the principal imaging modalities used in assessment. US is well suited for initial evaluation due to its wide availability, dynamic capability, and high spatial resolution for superficial tissues. It enables panoramic assessment of the posterior calf, allowing detection of muscle fiber disruption, myoaponeurotic injury, and intermuscular hematoma, while also facilitating exclusion of common mimics. MRI provides superior characterization of deep or subtle myoconnective tissue injuries and allows comprehensive assessment of injury extent and associated findings. In addition, MRI supports standardized grading using established muscle injury classification systems, which is valuable for prognosis and return-to-play decision-making. Emerging imaging techniques like quantitative MRI and artificial intelligence-based analysis may improve injury prognostication and individualized return-to-play assessment. This review summarizes the relevant anatomy, definitions, mechanisms of injury, and characteristic US and MRI features of tennis leg. Current classification systems are outlined, and key differential diagnoses and potential complications are also discussed.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41981329What 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.