HRT: Bioidentical vs Animal
10almonds is reader-supported. We may, at no cost to you, receive a portion of sales if you purchase a product through a link in this article.
HRT: A Tale Of Two Approaches
In yesterday’s newsletter, we asked you for your assessment of menopausal hormone replacement therapy (HRT).
- A little over a third said “It can be medically beneficial, but has some minor drawbacks”
- A little under a third said “It helps, but at the cost of increased cancer risk; not worth it”
- Almost as many said “It’s a wondrous cure-all that makes you happier, healthier, and smell nice too”
- Four said “It is a dangerous scam and a sham; “au naturel” is the way to go”
So what does the science say?
Which HRT?
One subscriber who voted for “It’s a wondrous cure-all that makes you healthier, happier, and smell nice too” wrote to add:
❝My answer is based on biodentical hormone replacement therapy. Your survey did not specify.❞
And that’s an important distinction! We did indeed mean bioidentical HRT, because, being completely honest here, this European writer had no idea that Premarin etc were still in such wide circulation in the US.
So to quickly clear up any confusion:
- Bioidentical hormones: these are (as the name suggests) identical on a molecular level to the kind produced by humans.
- Conjugated Equine Estrogens: such as Premarin, come from animals. Indeed, the name “Premarin” comes from “pregnant mare urine”, the substance used to make it.
There are also hormone analogs, such as medroxyprogesterone acetate, which is a progestin and not the same thing as progesterone. Hormone analogs such as the aforementioned MPA are again, a predominantly-American thing—though they did test it first in third-world countries, after testing it on animals and finding it gave them various kinds of cancer (breast, cervical, ovarian, uterine).
A quick jumping-off point if you’re interested in that:
Depot medroxyprogesterone acetate and the risk of breast and gynecologic cancer
this is about its use as a contraceptive (so, much lower doses needed), but it is the same thing sometimes given in the US as part of menopausal HRT. You will note that the date on that research is 1996; DMPA is not exactly cutting-edge and was first widely used in the 1950s.
Similarly, CEEs (like Premarin) have been used since the 1930s, while estradiol (bioidentical estrogen) has been in use since the 1970s.
In short: we recommend being wary of those older kinds and mostly won’t be talking about them here.
Bioidentical hormones are safer: True or False?
True! This is an open-and-shut case:
❝Physiological data and clinical outcomes demonstrate that bioidentical hormones are associated with lower risks, including the risk of breast cancer and cardiovascular disease, and are more efficacious than their synthetic and animal-derived counterparts.
Until evidence is found to the contrary, bioidentical hormones remain the preferred method of HRT. ❞
Further research since that review has further backed up its findings.
Source: Are Bioidentical Hormones Safer or More Efficacious than Other Commonly Used Versions in HRT?
So simply, if you’re going on HRT (estrogen and/or progesterone), you might want to check it’s the bioidentical kind.
HRT can increase the risk of breast cancer: True or False?
Contingently True, but for most people, there is no significant increase in risk.
First: again, we’re talking bioidentical hormones, and in this case, estradiol. Older animal-derived attempts had much higher risks with much lesser efficaciousness.
There have been so many studies on this (alas, none that have been publicised enough to undo the bad PR in the wake of old-fashioned HRT from before the 70s), but here’s a systematic review that highlights some very important things:
❝Estradiol-only therapy carries no risk for breast cancer, while the breast cancer risk varies according to the type of progestogen.
Estradiol therapy combined with medroxyprogesterone, norethisterone and levonorgestrel related to an increased risk of breast cancer, estradiol therapy combined with dydrogesterone and progesterone carries no risk❞
In fewer words:
- Estradiol by itself: no increased risk of breast cancer
- Estradiol with MDPA or other progestogens that aren’t really progesterone: increased risk of breast cancer
- Estradiol with actual progesterone: back to no increased risk of breast cancer
So again, you might want to make sure you are getting actual bioidentical hormones, and not something else!
However! If you are aware that you already have an increased risk of breast cancer (e.g. family history, you’ve had it before, you know you have certain genes for it, etc), then you should certainly discuss that with your doctor, because your personal circumstances may be different:
❝Tailored HRT may be used without strong evidence of a deleterious effect after ovarian cancer, endometrial cancer, most other gynecological cancers, bowel cancer, melanoma, a family history of breast cancer, benign breast disease, in carriers of BRACA mutations, after breast cancer if adjuvant therapy is not being used, past thromboembolism, varicose veins, fibroids and past endometriosis.
Relative contraindications are existing cardiovascular and cerebrovascular disease and breast cancer being treated with adjuvant therapies❞
Source: HRT in difficult circumstances: are there any absolute contraindications?
HRT makes you happier, healthier, and smell nice too: True or False?
Contingently True, assuming you do want its effects, which generally means the restoration of much of the youthful vitality you enjoyed pre-menopause.
The “and smell nice too” was partly rhetorical, but also partly literal: our scent is largely informed by our hormones, and higher estrogen results in a sweeter scent; lower estrogen results in a more bitter scent. Not generally considered an important health matter, but it’s a thing, so hey.
More often, people take menopausal HRT for more energy, stronger bones (reduced osteoporosis risk), healthier heart (reduced CVD risk), improved sexual health, better mood, healthier skin and hair, and general avoidance of menopause symptoms:
Read more: Skin, hair and beyond: the impact of menopause
We’d need another whole main feature to discuss all the benefits properly; today we’re just mythbusting.
HRT does have some drawbacks: True or False?
True, and/but how serious they are (beyond the aforementioned consideration in the case of an already-increased risk of breast cancer) is a matter of opinion.
For example, it is common to get a reprise of monthly cramps and/or mood swings, depending on how one is taking the HRT and other factors (e.g. your own personal physiology and genetic predispositions). For most people, these will even out over time.
It’s also even common to get a reprise of (much slighter than before) monthly bleeding, unless you have for example had a hysterectomy (no uterus = no bleeding). Again, this will usually settle down in a matter of months.
If you experience anything more alarming than that, then indeed check with your doctor.
HRT is a dangerous scam and sham: True or False?
False, simply. As described above, for most people they’re quite safe. Again, talking bioidentical hormones.
The other kind are in the most neutral sense a sham (i.e. they are literally sham hormones), though they’re not without their merits and for many people they may be better than nothing.
As for being a scam, biodentical hormones are widely prescribed in the many countries that have universal healthcare and/or a single-payer healthcare system, where there would be no profit motive (and considerable cost) in doing so.
They’re prescribed because they are effective and thus reduce healthcare spending in other areas (such as treating osteoporosis or CVD after the fact) and improve Health Related Quality of Life, and by extension, health-adjusted life-years, which is one of the top-used metrics for such systems.
See for example:
Our apologies, gentlemen
We wanted to also talk about testosterone therapy for the andropause, but we’ve run out of room today (because of covering the important distinction of bioidentical vs old-fashioned HRT)!
To make it up to you, we’ll do a full main feature on it (it’s an interesting topic) in the near future, so watch this space
Ladies, we’ll also at some point cover the pros and cons of different means of administration, e.g. pills, transdermal gel, injections, patches, pessaries, etc—which often have big differences.
That’ll be in a while though, because we try to vary our topics, so we can’t talk about menopausal HRT all the time, fascinating and important a topic it is.
Meanwhile… take care, all!
Don’t Forget…
Did you arrive here from our newsletter? Don’t forget to return to the email to continue learning!
Learn to Age Gracefully
Join the 98k+ American women taking control of their health & aging with our 100% free (and fun!) daily emails:
-
A Fresh Take On Hypothyroidism
10almonds is reader-supported. We may, at no cost to you, receive a portion of sales if you purchase a product through a link in this article.
The Three Rs To Boost Thyroid-Related Energy Levels
This is Dr. Izabella Wentz. She’s a doctor of pharmacology, and after her own diagnosis with Hashimoto’s thyroiditis, she has taken it up as her personal goal to educate others on managing hypothyroidism.
Dr. Wentz is also trained in functional medicine through The Institute for Functional Medicine, Kalish Functional Medicine, and the American Academy of Anti-Aging Medicine. She is a Fellow of the American Society of Consultant Pharmacists, and holds certifications in Medication Therapy Management as well as Advanced Diabetes Care through the American Pharmacists Association. In 2013, she received the Excellence in Innovation Award from the Illinois Pharmacists Association.
Dr. Wentz’s mission
Dr. Wentz was disenchanted by the general medical response to hypothyroidism in three main ways. She tells us:
- Thyroid patients are not diagnosed appropriately.
- For this, she criticises over-reliance on TSH tests that aren’t a reliable marker of thyroid function, especially if you have Hashimoto’s.
- Patients should be better optimized on their medications.
- For this, she criticizes many prescribed drugs that are actually pro-drugs*, that don’t get converted adequately if you have an underactive thyroid.
- Lifestyle interventions are often ignored by mainstream medicine.
- Medicines are great; they truly are. But medicating without adjusting lifestyle can be like painting over the cracks in a crumbling building.
*a “pro-drug” is what it’s called when the drug we take is not the actual drug the body needs, but is a precursor that will get converted to that actual drug we need, inside our body—usually by the liver, but not always. An example in this case is T4, which by definition is a pro-drug and won’t always get correctly converted to the T3 that a thyroid patient needs.
Well that does indeed sound worthy of criticism. But what does she advise instead?
First, she recommends a different diagnostic tool
Instead of (or at least, in addition to) TSH tests, she advises to ask for TPO tests (thyroid peroxidase), and a test for Tg antibodies (thyroglobulin). She says these are elevated for many years before a change in TSH is seen.
Next, identify the root cause and triggers
These can differ from person to person, but in countries that add iodine to salt, that’s often a big factor. And while gluten may or may not be a factor, there’s a strong correlation between celiac disease and Hashimoto’s disease, so it is worth checking too. Same goes for lactose.
By “checking”, here we mean testing eliminating it and seeing whether it makes a difference to energy levels—this can be slow, though, so give it time! It is best to do this under the guidance of a specialist if you can, of course.
Next, get to work on repairing your insides.
Remember we said “this can be slow”? It’s because your insides won’t necessarily bounce back immediately from whatever they’ve been suffering from for what’s likely many years. But, better late than never, and the time will pass anyway, so might as well get going on it.
For this, she recommends a gut-healthy diet with specific dietary interventions for hypothyroidism. Rather than repeat ourselves unduly here, we’ll link to a couple of previous articles of ours, as her recommendations match these:
She also recommends regular blood testing to see if you need supplementary TSH, TPO antibodies, and T3 and T4 hormones—as well as vitamin B12.
Short version
After diagnosis, she recommends the three Rs:
- Remove the causes and triggers of your hypothyroidism, so far as possible
- Repair the damage caused to your body, especially your gut
- Replace the thyroid hormones and related things in which your body has become deficient
Learn more
If you’d like to learn more about this, she offers a resource page, with resources ranging from on-screen information, to books you can get, to links to hook you up with blood tests if you need them, as well as recommended supplements to consider.
She also has a blog, which has an interesting relevant article added weekly.
Enjoy, and take care of yourself!
Share This Post
- Thyroid patients are not diagnosed appropriately.
-
Chiropractors have been banned again from manipulating babies’ spines. Here’s what the evidence actually says
10almonds is reader-supported. We may, at no cost to you, receive a portion of sales if you purchase a product through a link in this article.
Chiropractors in Australia will not be able to perform spinal manipulation on children under the age of two once more, following health concerns from doctors and politicians.
But what is the spinal treatment at the centre of the controversy? Does it work? Is there evidence of harm?
We’re a team of researchers who specialise in evidence-based musculoskeletal health. I (Matt) am a registered chiropractor, Joshua is a registered physiotherapist and Giovanni trained as a physiotherapist.
Here’s what the evidence says.
Dmitry Naumov/Shutterstock Remind me, how did this all come about?
A Melbourne-based chiropractor posted a video on social media in 2018 using a spring-loaded device (known as the Activator) to manipulate the spine of a two-week-old baby suspended upside down by the ankles.
The video sparked widespread concerns among the public, medical associations and politicians. It prompted a ban on the procedure in young children. The Victorian health minister commissioned Safer Care Victoria to conduct an independent review of spinal manipulation techniques on children.
Recently, the Chiropractic Board of Australia reinstated chiropractors’ authorisation to perform spinal manipulation on babies under two years old. But this week, it backflipped, following heavy criticism from medical associations and politicians.
What is spinal manipulation?
Spinal manipulation is a treatment used by chiropractors and other health professionals such as doctors, osteopaths and physiotherapists.
It is an umbrella term that includes popular “back cracking” techniques.
It also includes more gentle forms of treatment, such as massage or joint mobilisations. These involve applying pressure to joints without generating a “cracking” sound.
Does spinal manipulation in babies work?
Several international guidelines for health-care professionals recommend spinal manipulation to treat adults with conditions such as back pain and headache as there is an abundance of evidence on the topic. For example, spinal manipulation for back pain is supported by data from nearly 10,000 adults.
For children, it’s a different story. Safer Care Victoria’s 2019 review of spinal manipulation found very few studies testing whether this treatment was safe and effective in children.
Studies were generally small and were of poor quality. Some of those small, poor-quality studies, suggest spinal manipulation provides a very small benefit for back pain, colic and potentially bedwetting – some common reasons for parents to take their child to see a chiropractor. But overall, the review found the overall body of evidence was very poor.
Spinal manipulation doesn’t seem to help young children with an ear infection. MIA Studio/Shutterstock However, for most other children’s conditions chiropractors treat – such as headache, asthma, otitis media (a type of ear infection), cerebral palsy, hyperactivity and torticollis (“twisted neck”) – there did not appear to be a benefit.
The number of studies investigating the effectiveness of spinal manipulation on babies under two years of age was even smaller.
There was one high-quality study and two small, poor quality studies. These did not show an appreciable benefit of spinal manipulation on colic, otitis media with effusion (known as glue ear) or twisted neck in babies.
Is spinal manipulation on babies safe?
In terms of safety, most studies in the review found serious complications were extremely rare. The review noted one baby or child dying (a report from Germany in 2001 after spinal manipulation by a physiotherapist). The most common complications were mild in nature such as increased crying and soreness.
However, because studies were very small, they cannot tell us anything about the safety of spinal manipulation in a reliable way. Studies that are designed to properly investigate if a treatment is safe typically include thousands of patients. And these studies have not yet been done.
Why do people see chiropractors?
Safer Care Victoria also conducted surveys with more than 20,000 people living in Australia who had taken their children under 12 years old to a chiropractor in the past ten years.
Nearly three-quarters said that was for treatment of a child aged two years or younger.
Nearly all people surveyed reported a positive experience when they took their child to a chiropractor and reported that their child’s condition improved with chiropractic care. Only a small number of people (0.3%) reported a negative experience, and this was mostly related to cost of treatment, lack of improvement in their child’s condition, excessive use of x-rays, and perceived pressure to avoid medications.
Many of the respondents had also consulted their GP or maternity/child health nurse.
What now for spinal manipulation in children?
At the request of state and federal ministers, the Chiropractic Board of Australia confirmed that spinal manipulation on babies under two years old will continue to be banned until it discusses the issue further with health ministers.
Many chiropractors believe this is unfair, especially considering the strong consumer support for chiropractic care outlined in the Safer Care Victoria report, and the rarity of serious reported harms in children.
Others believe that in the absence of evidence of benefit and uncertainty around whether spinal manipulation is safe in children and babies, the precautionary principle should apply and children and babies should not receive spinal manipulation.
Ultimately, high quality research is urgently needed to better understand whether spinal manipulation is beneficial for the range of conditions chiropractors provide it for, and whether the benefit outweighs the extremely small chance of a serious complication.
This will help parents make an informed choice about health care for their child.
Matt Fernandez, Senior lecturer and researcher in chiropractic, CQUniversity Australia; Giovanni E. Ferreira, NHMRC Emerging Leader Research Fellow, Institute of Musculoskeletal Health, University of Sydney, and Joshua Zadro, NHMRC Emerging Leader Research Fellow, Sydney Musculoskeletal Health, University of Sydney
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
Share This Post
-
Come Together – by Dr. Emily Nagoski
10almonds is reader-supported. We may, at no cost to you, receive a portion of sales if you purchase a product through a link in this article.
From Dr. Emily Nagoski, author of the bestseller “Come As You Are” (which we reviewed very favorably before) we now present: Come Together.
What it is not about: simultaneous orgasms. The title is just a play on words.
What it is about: improving sexual wellbeing, particularly in long-term relationships where one or more partner(s) may be experiencing low desire.
Hence: come together, in the closeness sense.
A lot of books (or advice articles) out there take the Cosmo approach of “spicing things up”, and that can help for a night perhaps, but relying on novelty is not a sustainable approach.
Instead, what Dr. Nagoski outlines here is a method for focusing on shared comfort and pleasure over desire, creating the right state of mind that’s more conducive to sexuality, and reducing things that put the brakes on sexuality.
She also covers things whereby sexuality can often be obliged to change (for example, with age and/or disability), but that with the right attitude, change can sometimes just be growth in a different way, as you explore the new circumstances together, and continue to find shared pleasure in the ways that best suit your changing circumstances,
Bottom line: if you and/or your partner(s) would like to foster and maintain intimacy and pleasure, then this is a top-tier book for you.
Click here to check out Come Together, and, well, come together!
Share This Post
-
How Are You, Really?
10almonds is reader-supported. We may, at no cost to you, receive a portion of sales if you purchase a product through a link in this article.
How Are You, Really? The Free NHS Health Test
We took this surprisingly incisive 10-minute test from the UK’s famous National Health Service—the test is part of the “Better Health” programme, a free-to-all (yes, even those from/in other countries) initiative aimed at keeping people healthy enough to have less need of medical attention.
As one person who took the test wrote:
❝I didn’t expect that a government initiative would have me talking about how I need to keep myself going to be there for the people I love, let alone that a rapid-pace multiple-choice test would elicit these responses and give personalized replies in turn, but here we are❞
It goes beyond covering the usual bases, in that it also looks at what’s most important to you, and why, and what might keep you from doing the things you want/need to do for your health, AND how those obstacles can be overcome.
Pretty impressive for a 10-minute test!
Is Your Health Above Average Already? Take the Free 10-minute NHS test now!
How old are you, in your heart?
Poetic answers notwithstanding (this writer sometimes feels so old, and yet also much younger than she is), there’s a biological answer here, too.
Again free for the use of all*, here’s a heart age calculator.
*It is suitable for you if you are aged 30–95, and do not have a known complicating cardiovascular disease.
It will ask you your (UK) postcode; just leave that field blank if you’re not in the UK; it’ll be fine.
How Old Are You, In Your Heart? Take the Free 10-minute NHS test now!
(Neither test requires logging into anything, and they do not ask for your email address. The tests are right there on the page, and they give the answers right there on the page, immediately)
Don’t Forget…
Did you arrive here from our newsletter? Don’t forget to return to the email to continue learning!
Learn to Age Gracefully
Join the 98k+ American women taking control of their health & aging with our 100% free (and fun!) daily emails:
-
Frozen/Thawed/Refrozen Meat: How Much Is Safety, And How Much Is Taste?
10almonds is reader-supported. We may, at no cost to you, receive a portion of sales if you purchase a product through a link in this article.
What You Can (And Can’t) Safely Do With Frozen Meat
Yesterday, we asked you:
❝You have meat in the freezer. How long is it really safe to keep it?❞
…and got a range of answers, mostly indicating to a) follow the instructions (a very safe general policy) and b) do not refreeze if thawed because that would be unsafe. Fewer respondents indicated that meat could be kept for much longer than guidelines say, or conversely, that it should only be kept for weeks or less.
So, what does the science say?
Meat can be kept indefinitely (for all intents and purposes) in a freezer; it just might get tougher: True or False?
False, assuming we are talking about a normal household electrical freezer that bottoms out at about -18℃ / 0℉.
Fun fact: cryobiologists cryopreserve tissue samples (so basically, meat) at -196℃ / -320℉, and down at those temperatures, the tissues will last a lot longer than you will (and, for all practical purposes: indefinitely). There are other complications with doing so (such as getting the sample through the glass transition point without cracking it during the vitrification process) but those are beyond the scope of this article.
If you remember back to your physics or perhaps chemistry classes at school, you’ll know that molecules move more quickly at higher temperatures, and more slowly at lower ones, only approaching true stillness as they near absolute zero (-273℃ / -459℉ / 0K ← we’re not saying it’s ok, although it is; rather, that is zero kelvin; no degree sign is used with kelvins)
That means that when food is frozen, the internal processes aren’t truly paused; it’s just slowed to a point of near imperceptibility.
So, all the way up at the relatively warm temperatures of a household freezer, a lot of processes are still going on.
What this means in practical terms: those guidelines saying “keep in the freezer for up to 4 months”, “keep in the freezer for up to 9 months”, “keep in the freezer for up to 12 months” etc are being honest with you.
More or less, anyway! They’ll usually underestimate a little to be on the safe side—but so should you.
Bad things start happening within weeks at most: True or False?
False, for all practical purposes. Again, assuming a normal and properly-working household freezer as described above.
(True, technically but misleadingly: the bad things never stopped; they just slowed down to a near imperceptible pace—again, as described above)
By “bad” here we should clarify we mean “dangerous”. One subscriber wrote:
❝Meat starts losing color and flavor after being in the freezer for too long. I keep meat in the freezer for about 2 months at the most❞
…and as a matter of taste, that’s fair enough!
It is unsafe to refreeze meat that has been thawed: True or False?
False! Assuming it has otherwise been kept chilled, just the same as for fresh meat.
Food poisoning comes from bacteria, and there is nothing about the meat previously having been frozen that will make it now have more bacteria.
That means, for example…
- if it was thawed (but chilled) for a period of time, treat it like you would any other meat that has been chilled for that period of time (so probably: use it or freeze it, unless it’s been more than a few days)
- if it was thawed (and at room temperature) for a period of time, treat it like you would any other meat that has been at room temperature for that period of time (so probably: throw it out, unless the period of time is very small indeed)
The USDA gives for 2 hours max at room temperature before considering it unsalvageable, by the way.
However! Whenever you freeze meat (or almost anything with cells, really), ice crystals will form in and between cells. How much ice crystallization occurs depends on several variables, with how much water there is present in the food is usually the biggest factor (remember that animal cells are—just like us—mostly water).
Those ice crystals will damage the cell walls, causing the food to lose structural integrity. When you thaw it out, the ice crystals will disappear but the damage will be left behind (this is what “freezer burn” is).
So if your food seems a little “squishy” after having been frozen and thawed, that’s why. It’s not rotten; it’s just been stabbed countless times on a microscopic level.
The more times you freeze and thaw and refreeze food, the more this will happen. Your food will degrade in structural integrity each time, but the safety of it won’t have changed meaningfully.
Want to know more?
Further reading:
You can thaw and refreeze meat: five food safety myths busted
Take care!
Don’t Forget…
Did you arrive here from our newsletter? Don’t forget to return to the email to continue learning!
Learn to Age Gracefully
Join the 98k+ American women taking control of their health & aging with our 100% free (and fun!) daily emails:
-
Surgery is the default treatment for ACL injuries in Australia. But it’s not the only way
10almonds is reader-supported. We may, at no cost to you, receive a portion of sales if you purchase a product through a link in this article.
The anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) is an important ligament in the knee. It runs from the thigh bone (femur) to the shin bone (tibia) and helps stabilise the knee joint.
Injuries to the ACL, often called a “tear” or a “rupture”, are common in sport. While a ruptured ACL has just sidelined another Matildas star, people who play sport recreationally are also at risk of this injury.
For decades, surgical repair of an ACL injury, called a reconstruction, has been the primary treatment in Australia. In fact, Australia has among the highest rates of ACL surgery in the world. Reports indicate 90% of people who rupture their ACL go under the knife.
Although surgery is common – around one million are performed worldwide each year – and seems to be the default treatment for ACL injuries in Australia, it may not be required for everyone.
PeopleImages.com – Yuri A/Shutterstock What does the research say?
We know ACL ruptures can be treated using reconstructive surgery, but research continues to suggest they can also be treated with rehabilitation alone for many people.
Almost 15 years ago a randomised clinical trial published in the New England Journal of Medicine compared early surgery to rehabilitation with the option of delayed surgery in young active adults with an ACL injury. Over half of people in the rehabilitation group did not end up having surgery. After five years, knee function did not differ between treatment groups.
The findings of this initial trial have been supported by more research since. A review of three trials published in 2022 found delaying surgery and trialling rehabilitation leads to similar outcomes to early surgery.
A 2023 study followed up patients who received rehabilitation without surgery. It showed one in three had evidence of ACL healing on an MRI after two years. There was also evidence of improved knee-related quality of life in those with signs of ACL healing compared to those whose ACL did not show signs of healing.
Experts used to think an ACL tear couldn’t heal without surgery – now there’s evidence it can. SKYKIDKID/Shutterstock Regardless of treatment choice the rehabilitation process following ACL rupture is lengthy. It usually involves a minimum of nine months of progressive rehabilitation performed a few days per week. The length of time for rehabilitation may be slightly shorter in those not undergoing surgery, but more research is needed in this area.
Rehabilitation starts with a physiotherapist overseeing simple exercises right through to resistance exercises and dynamic movements such as jumping, hopping and agility drills.
A person can start rehabilitation with the option of having surgery later if the knee remains unstable. A common sign of instability is the knee giving way when changing direction while running or playing sports.
To rehab and wait, or to go straight under the knife?
There are a number of reasons patients and clinicians may opt for early surgical reconstruction.
For elite athletes, a key consideration is returning to sport as soon as possible. As surgery is a well established method, athletes (such as Matilda Sam Kerr) often opt for early surgical reconstruction as this gives them a more predictable timeline for recovery.
At the same time, there are risks to consider when rushing back to sport after ACL reconstruction. Re-injury of the ACL is very common. For every month return to sport is delayed until nine months after ACL reconstruction, the rate of knee re-injury is reduced by 51%.
For people who opt to try rehabilitation, the option of having surgery later is still there. PeopleImages.com – Yuri A/Shutterstock Historically, another reason for having early surgical reconstruction was to reduce the risk of future knee osteoarthritis, which increases following an ACL injury. But a review showed ACL reconstruction doesn’t reduce the risk of knee osteoarthritis in the long term compared with non-surgical treatment.
That said, there’s a need for more high-quality, long-term studies to give us a better understanding of how knee osteoarthritis risk is influenced by different treatments.
Rehab may not be the only non-surgical option
Last year, a study looking at 80 people fitted with a specialised knee brace for 12 weeks found 90% had evidence of ACL healing on their follow-up MRI.
People with more ACL healing on the three-month MRI reported better outcomes at 12 months, including higher rates of returning to their pre-injury level of sport and better knee function. Although promising, we now need comparative research to evaluate whether this method can achieve similar results to surgery.
What to do if you rupture your ACL
First, it’s important to seek a comprehensive medical assessment from either a sports physiotherapist, sports physician or orthopaedic surgeon. ACL injuries can also have associated injuries to surrounding ligaments and cartilage which may influence treatment decisions.
In terms of treatment, discuss with your clinician the pros and cons of management options and whether surgery is necessary. Often, patients don’t know not having surgery is an option.
Surgery appears to be necessary for some people to achieve a stable knee. But it may not be necessary in every case, so many patients may wish to try rehabilitation in the first instance where appropriate.
As always, prevention is key. Research has shown more than half of ACL injuries can be prevented by incorporating prevention strategies. This involves performing specific exercises to strengthen muscles in the legs, and improve movement control and landing technique.
Anthony Nasser, Senior Lecturer in Physiotherapy, University of Technology Sydney; Joshua Pate, Senior Lecturer in Physiotherapy, University of Technology Sydney, and Peter Stubbs, Senior Lecturer in Physiotherapy, University of Technology Sydney
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
Don’t Forget…
Did you arrive here from our newsletter? Don’t forget to return to the email to continue learning!
Learn to Age Gracefully
Join the 98k+ American women taking control of their health & aging with our 100% free (and fun!) daily emails:
