SynthesisBMC musculoskeletal disorders2026
The efficacy of eccentric exercise in the treatment of Achilles tendinopathy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in BMC musculoskeletal disorders, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BackgroundAchilles tendinopathy(AT) is a prevalent degenerative disorder affecting athletes and individuals of the general population, with significant socioeconomic impacts. While eccentric exercise(EE) has emerged as a promising intervention, its comparative efficacy against other conservative treatments remains inconclusive due to limitations in previous meta-analyses. This study aimed to comprehensively evaluate EE’s efficacy by incorporating both clinical symptoms and ultrasonographic structural outcomes.MethodFollowing Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses(PRISMA) guidelines, we analyzed 21 randomized controlled trials(RCTs)(n = 994) from major databases up to September 2025. Studies comparing EE with other conservative treatments(exercise/physical/injection therapies) were included. Primary outcomes included pain(Visual Analogue Scale, VAS/numerical rating scale, NRS), function(Victorian Institute of Sport Assessment-Achilles, VISA-A), and ultrasonography parameters. Risk of bias was assessed using Cochrane criteria, and random-effects models calculated effect sizes(Standardized Mean Differences, SMDs with 95% CIs).ResultEE demonstrated superior pain reduction compared to physical modalities(VAS: SMD=-0.54; NRS: SMD=-0.29) but showed comparable effects to other exercise therapies. Ultrasonography revealed significant improvements in tendon structure, with increased anteroposterior(AP) thickness(SMD = 0.41) and reduced vascularity. Functional outcomes (VISA-A) indicated smaller improvements in the EE group versus controls, with extremely high heterogeneity(I²=86.1%), precluding definitive conclusions.DiscussionThe findings establish EE’s dual benefits: symptom relief and structural improvement. Its superiority over physical therapies likely stems from enhanced neuromuscular control and potential tendon remodeling. The equivalent efficacy to other exercises suggests mechanical loading intensity as the key therapeutic driver. High heterogeneity in functional outcomes underscores the need for standardized protocols and AT subtype-specific approaches.ConclusionThis meta-analysis confirms EE can serve as a first-line treatment option for AT within load-based exercise programs, particularly when structural improvement is desired. However, it is not an independent gold standard superior to other forms of exercise. While equally effective as other exercises for pain relief, EE offers unique advantages in tendon remodeling. Future research should address protocol standardization and subtype stratification to optimize clinical 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.