Article Text

Download PDFPDF

Does the intramuscular tendon act like a free tendon?
  1. Peter Brukner1,
  2. Jill L Cook1,
  3. Craig Robert Purdam2
  1. 1 La Trobe Sport and Exercise Medicine Research Centre, La Trobe University, Bundoora, Victoria, Australia
  2. 2 Physical Therapies, Australian Institute of Sport, Bruce, Australia
  1. Correspondence to Dr Peter Brukner, La Trobe Sport and Exercise Research Centre, La Trobe University, Melbourne, VIC 3086, Australia; peterbrukner{at}gmail.com

Statistics from Altmetric.com

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

There​ ​has​ ​been​ ​a​n​ ​upsurge​ ​of​ ​interest,​ ​and​ ​some​ ​confusion, about​ ​the​ ​role​ ​of​ ​the ​connective​ ​tissue​ ​condensations within​ ​the​​ ​lower​ ​limb​ ​muscles, notably​​ ​biceps​ ​femoris,​ ​rectus femoris, ​gastrocnemius​ ​and​ ​soleus.​ ​These​ ​bands​ ​are​​ ​variably referred​ ​to​ ​in the​ ​literature​ ​as ​intramuscular​ ​tendon, connective tissue, central tendon​ ​or​ ​aponeurosis, and can have a variable appearance (aponeurotic, cord-like) and vary between individuals.1​ ​

These intramuscular tendons (​IMTs) act as​ central​ ​supporting​ ​struts​ ​to​ ​which​ ​the​ ​muscle fibres​ ​attach​, and they smooth and amalgamate asynchronous motor unit contribution. ​ ​ ​Muscle strain may tear the myofibrillar attachments​​ ​from​ ​the​ intramuscular​ ​tendon, ​​ with resultant​ bleeding and oedema. Occasionally​, ​the​ ​damage​ ​may also involve a partial or complete tear of ​the​ ​ intramuscular​ ​tendon itself.

When​ ​the​ ​ intramuscular​ ​tendon ​is​ ​damaged, ​ ​the​ ​injury​ ​is​ ​regarded​ ​as​ a ​more severe strain. ​ Damage to​ ​the​ intramuscular​ ​tendon ​of​ ​the hamstring group ​ has been associated with a prolonged ​​return​ ​to​ ​play​​,2 3 although van​ ​der​ ​Made​ ​et​ ​al 4 reported​ ​only​ ​a​ modest increase in return to play duration. ​​​ Differences in the sporting demands of these cohorts may contribute to the …

View Full Text