It appears you don't have support to open PDFs in this web browser. To view this file, Open with your PDF reader
Abstract
Objectives
Changes in mechanical loading as well as pathology can modify the Achilles tendon mechanical properties and therefore detection of these changes is relevant for the diagnosis and management of Achilles tendinopathy. The aim of this study was to evaluate strain and shear wave sonoelastography for their ability to detect changes in the Achilles tendon mechanical properties during a series of isometric contractions.
Methods
Longitudinal sonoelastography images of the Achilles tendon were acquired from 20 healthy participants using four different ultrasound devices; two implementing strain sonoelastography technology (SE1, SE2) and two, shear wave elastography technology (SWE1, SWE2).
Results
SE1 measured a decreasing strain ratio (tendon become harder) during the different contraction levels from 1.51 (0.92) to 0.33 (0.16) whereas SE2 mesaured a decreasing strain ratio from 1.08 (0.76) to 0.50 (0.32). SWE1 measured decreasing tendon stiffness during contractions of increasing intensity from 33.40 (19.61) to 16.19 (2.68) whereas SWE2 revealed increasing tendon stiffness between the first two contraction levels from 428.65 (131.5) kPa to 487.9 (121.5) kPa followed by decreasing stiffness for the higher contraction levels from 459.35 (113.48) kPa to 293.5 (91.18) kPa.
Conclusions
Strain elastography used with a reference material was able to detect elasticity changes between the different contraction levels whereas shear wave elastography was less able to detect changes in Achilles tendon stiffness when under load. Inconsistent results between the two technologies should be further investigated.
You have requested "on-the-fly" machine translation of selected content from our databases. This functionality is provided solely for your convenience and is in no way intended to replace human translation. Show full disclaimer
Neither ProQuest nor its licensors make any representations or warranties with respect to the translations. The translations are automatically generated "AS IS" and "AS AVAILABLE" and are not retained in our systems. PROQUEST AND ITS LICENSORS SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIM ANY AND ALL EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY WARRANTIES FOR AVAILABILITY, ACCURACY, TIMELINESS, COMPLETENESS, NON-INFRINGMENT, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. Your use of the translations is subject to all use restrictions contained in your Electronic Products License Agreement and by using the translation functionality you agree to forgo any and all claims against ProQuest or its licensors for your use of the translation functionality and any output derived there from. Hide full disclaimer
Details








1 University of Birmingham, Centre of Precision Rehabilitation for Spinal Pain (CPR Spine), School of Sport, Exercise and Rehabilitation Sciences, College of Life and Environmental Sciences, Birmingham, UK (GRID:grid.6572.6) (ISNI:0000 0004 1936 7486); University of Applied Sciences and Arts of Southern Switzerland, SUPSI, Rehabilitation Research Laboratory 2rLab, Department of Business Economics, Health and Social Care, Manno/Landquart, Switzerland (GRID:grid.16058.3a) (ISNI:0000000123252233)
2 Fondazione IRCCS Policlinico San Matteo, Dipartimento di radiologia, Pavia, Italy (GRID:grid.419425.f) (ISNI:0000 0004 1760 3027)
3 University of Applied Sciences and Arts of Southern Switzerland, SUPSI, Rehabilitation Research Laboratory 2rLab, Department of Business Economics, Health and Social Care, Manno/Landquart, Switzerland (GRID:grid.16058.3a) (ISNI:0000000123252233)
4 University of Birmingham, Centre of Precision Rehabilitation for Spinal Pain (CPR Spine), School of Sport, Exercise and Rehabilitation Sciences, College of Life and Environmental Sciences, Birmingham, UK (GRID:grid.6572.6) (ISNI:0000 0004 1936 7486)