Incidence of Deep Venous Thrombosis Associated With Proximal Hamstring Rupture

Background: Rates of deep venous thrombosis (DVT) have been studied for most common orthopaedic injuries. However, rates and risk factors have not been published for proximal hamstring injuries. Purpose: To determine the incidence of symptomatic DVT associated with proximal hamstring rupture and associations with prophylactic anticoagulation. Study Design: Case series; Level of evidence, 4. Methods: Inclusion criteria included all complete and, in a separate cohort, partial proximal hamstring ruptures treated by the senior author from 2007 through 2018 with at least 8 weeks of follow-up. Tendinopathy without tear was excluded. No DVT screening was performed. Charts of patients with symptomatic DVT were reviewed for the treatment method, the presence of imaging-confirmed DVT or pulmonary embolism, and risk factors for DVT. No patients received postinjury DVT prophylaxis. Surgical patients were routinely instructed to take aspirin (325 mg bid) or apixaban (2.5 mg bid) for 4 weeks. Patients with risk factors for DVT received enoxaparin (40 mg daily) for 2 weeks followed by aspirin (325 mg bid) for 2 weeks. Results: A total of 144 complete proximal hamstring ruptures were included: 132 treated operatively and 12 treated nonoperatively. There were 10 DVTs associated with the injury, for an overall rate of 6.9%. Five of the DVTs were diagnosed preoperatively in patients who had not received DVT prophylaxis; the other 5 were diagnosed postoperatively in patients on DVT prophylaxis. Six of the 10 DVTs had identifiable risk factors. All patients with postoperatively diagnosed DVTs were on prophylactic aspirin or enoxaparin. In the partial proximal hamstring rupture cohort of 114 ruptures, there were no DVTs. Conclusion: There is a high incidence of DVT associated with complete proximal hamstring ruptures (6.9%) despite many patients receiving DVT prophylaxis. This is substantially higher than that in other lower extremity injuries. Clinicians should have a high index of suspicion for DVT after these injuries, and postinjury DVT prophylaxis may be warranted.

High-Grade Partial and Retracted (<2 cm) Proximal Hamstring Ruptures

Background: High-grade partial proximal hamstring tears and complete tears with retraction less than 2 cm are a subset of proximal hamstring injuries where, historically, treatment has been nonoperative. It is unknown how nonoperative treatment compares with operative treatment. Hypothesis: The clinical and functional outcomes of nonoperative and operative treatment of partial/complete proximal hamstring tears were compared. We hypothesize that operative treatment of these tears leads to better clinical and functional results. Study Design: Case series; Level of evidence, 4. Methods: A retrospective review identified patients with a high-grade partial or complete proximal hamstring rupture with retraction less than 2 cm treated either operatively or nonoperatively from 2007 to 2015. All patients had an initial period of nonoperative treatment. Surgery was offered if patients had continued pain and/or limited function refractory to nonoperative treatment with physical therapy. Outcome measures were each patient’s strength perception, ability to return to activity, Lower Extremity Functional Scale (LEFS) score, Short Form–12 (SF-12) physical and mental component outcome scores, distance traversed by a single-leg hop, and Biodex hamstring strength testing. Results: A total of 25 patients were enrolled in the study. The 15 patients who were treated nonoperatively sustained injuries at a mean age of 55.73 ± 14.83 years and were evaluated 35.47 ± 30.35 months after injury. The 10 patients who elected to have surgery sustained injuries at 50.40 ± 6.31 years of age ( P = .23) and were evaluated 30.11 ± 19.43 months after surgery. LEFS scores were significantly greater for the operative group compared with the nonoperative group (77/80 vs 64.3/80; P = .01). SF-12 physical component scores for the operative group were also significantly greater ( P = .03). Objectively, operative and nonoperative treatment modalities showed no significant difference in terms of single-leg hop distance compared with each patient’s noninjured leg ( P = .26) and torque deficit at isokinetic speeds of 60 and 180 deg/s ( P = .46 and .70, respectively). Conclusion: Patients who undergo operative and nonoperative treatment of high-grade partial and/or complete proximal hamstring tears with <2 cm retraction demonstrate good clinical and functional outcomes. In our series, 40% of patients treated nonoperatively with physical therapy went on to have surgery. For those patients with persistent pain and/or loss of function despite conservative treatment, surgical repair is a viable treatment option that is met with good results.

A Novel Technique for Proximal Hamstring Tendon Repair: High Reoperation Rate in a Series of 56 Patients

This investigation looked at functional outcomes, following a novel technique of surgical repair using table staples. Patients underwent surgery for proximal hamstring rupture with table staples used to hold the tendon reapproximated to the ischial tuberosity. Functional outcomes following surgery were assessed. We also used a combined outcome assessment measure: the Perth Hamstring Assessment Tool (PHAT). A total of 56 patients with a mean age of 51 (range 15–71) underwent surgery. The mean follow-up duration was 26 months (range 8–59 months). A large proportion of patients (21/56, 37.5%) required reoperation for removal of the staple. Patients that did not require removal of the table staple did well postoperatively, with low pain scores (0.8–2 out of 10) and good levels of return to sport or running (75.8%). Those that required removal of the staple had a significantly lower PHAT score prior to removal, 47.8, but this improved markedly once the staple was removed, with a mean of 77.2 (P<0.001). Although our patients achieved similar outcomes in terms of pain and function, we thought the reoperation rate was unacceptably high. We would not recommend proximal hamstring tendon repair using this technique.