Return to Play and Pattern of Injury After ACL Rupture in a Consecutive Series of Elite UEFA Soccer Players
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Anterior cruciate ligament rupture represents a career-threatening injury for professional soccer players. Purpose: To analyze the pattern of injury, return to play (RTP), and performance of a consecutive series of elite professional soccer players after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR). Study Design: Case series; Level of evidence, 4. Methods: We evaluated the medical records of 40 consecutive elite soccer players who underwent ACLR by a single surgeon between September 2018 and May 2022. Patient age, height, weight, body mass index, position, injury history, affected side, RTP time, minutes played per season (MPS), and MPS as a percentage of playable minutes before and after ACLR were retrieved from medical records and from publicly available media-based platforms. Results: Included were 27 male patients (mean ± SD age at surgery, 23.2 ± 4.3 years; range, 18-34 years). The injury occurred during matches in 24 players (88.9%), with a noncontact mechanism in 22 (91.7%). Meniscal pathology was found in 21 patients (77.8%). Lateral meniscectomy and meniscal repair were performed in 2 (7.4%) and 14 (51.9%) patients, respectively, and medial meniscectomy and meniscal repair were performed in 3 (11.1%) and 13 (48.1%) patients, respectively. A total of 17 players (63.0%) underwent ACLR with bone–patellar tendon–bone autograft and 10 (37.0%) with soft tissue quadriceps tendon. Lateral extra-articular tenodesis was added in 5 patients (18.5%). The overall RTP rate was 92.6% (25 of 27). Two athletes moved to a lower league after surgery. The mean MPS% during the last preinjury season was 56.69% ± 21.71%; this decreased significantly to 29.18% ± 20.6% ( P < .001) in the first postoperative season and then increased to 57.76% ± 22.89% and 55.89% ± 25.8% in the second and third postoperative seasons. Two (7.4%) reruptures and 2 (7.4%) failed meniscal repairs were reported. Conclusion: ACLR in elite UEFA soccer players was associated with a 92.6% rate of RTP and 7.4% rate of reinjury within 6 months after primary surgery. Moreover, 7.4% of soccer players moved to a lower league during the first season after surgery. Age, graft selection, concomitant treatments, and lateral extra-articular tenodesis were not significantly associated with prolonged RTP.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".