A knee that no longer bends after a blow to the thigh: the dead leg is the most ordinary of contact injuries, and the only one that can end in ossification inside the muscle or in emergency fasciotomy. Here is how to grade it, what to do in the first 24 hours, and what myositis ossificans really hinges on.

Review article. Every figure quoted carries its source at the point where it is written. Claims that circulate without an identifiable primary source are flagged as such rather than repeated: a whole chapter is devoted to them.

In brief: the clinical synthesis

What the available literature says, in ten points. Each one is taken up and sourced in the chapters that follow.

• The dead leg is a direct injury, produced by the muscle being crushed against the femur. It does not behave like a strain: in the UEFA cohort, direct thigh injuries cost on average 7 days of absence against 18.5 days for indirect ones¹.
• Severity is read from knee flexion, not from pain and not from the volume of the thigh. It is the founding measurement of Jackson and Feagin (1973), taken up by Ryan (1991) at 12-24 hours: minor above 90°, moderate between 45 and 90°, severe below 45°^2,3.
• The first 24 hours are played out in flexion, not in extension. Immobilising the knee at 120° of flexion for 24 hours has been associated with a mean return at 3.5 days in a series of 47 athletes, against 13 to 21 days with a conventional protocol^3,4.
• Immediate compression has not proved itself. The only controlled trial to have tested it within 5 minutes found no difference in the ultrasound size of the haematoma or in the time to recovery⁵.
• The complication that defines the prognosis is myositis ossificans, a heterotopic ossification of the bruised muscle. It affected 9% of the cadets in Ryan's series, and its frequency depends on initial severity, not on chance^2,3.
• Ryan identified five factors associated with myositis ossificans: knee flexion below 120°, injury sustained in American football, previous quadriceps injury, treatment delay of more than 3 days, ipsilateral knee effusion².
• Myositis ossificans is not a disaster. In the French series from Brest (19 traumatic cases followed by ultrasound), 89.5% of the athletes had regained their previous level at 6 months, all of them at 12 months, without specific treatment and despite the ossification persisting⁶.
• The real danger lies elsewhere and it is rare: thigh compartment syndrome. Disproportionate and increasing pain, a tight thigh, pain on passive stretch of the quadriceps: this is a surgical emergency, including in an athlete with no fracture^7,8,9.
• The return criterion has been agreed since 1992 and has never been displaced: a pain-free knee that flexes to 120° with the hip in extension, plus complete functional tests, plus a thigh guard^4,20.
• The overall level of evidence is low and that has to be said. The reference systematic review retained only seven studies, all of level IV, with a mean return time of 29.3 days and a range from 2 to 180 days¹⁰.

What is a dead leg, and why is it not a strain?

The distinction between direct and indirect injury is not a nicety of nomenclature. It changes the mechanism, the site of the lesion, the prognosis and the risk of complication. An article that treats the two together gets it wrong twice.

A crush, not a stretch

A strain arises from an eccentric contraction: the muscle contracts while it lengthens, and the myotendinous junction gives way. A dead leg arises from an impact: an opponent's knee, helmet or shoulder crushes the muscle belly against the femur, which acts as an anvil. The lesion is therefore deep, centred on the point of impact, and it readily involves the muscle plane closest to the bone.

The reference review on muscle trauma, published in 2023 in Nature Reviews Disease Primers, sets out this dichotomy from the start: indirect injuries (strains, ruptures) occur "without the influence of direct external trauma" and result from muscle activation during lengthening, whereas direct injuries (contusions, lacerations) result from an external impact¹². The Munich consensus, which has structured the terminology of muscle injuries in sport since 2013, moreover deals with contusion outside its main axis: its four types (overuse, neuromuscular, partial tear, subtotal tear or avulsion) describe the indirect side, and contusion is named separately¹³.

The management of muscle injuries has shifted in five years: from rest, immobilisation and initial (over)protection towards early activation and progressive loading. That is the central message of the Nature Reviews Disease Primers 2023 review, and it is exactly what the 24-hour flexion protocol was anticipating back in 1991.

What happens inside the muscle

The sequence was described in the review by Beiner and Jokl: microscopic rupture and injury to muscle cells, macroscopic defects in the muscle belly, infiltrating bleeding, inflammation. The authors sum up repair in a formula that is useful in the clinic, it is a race between remodelling and scar formation¹⁴. Everything that helps remodelling win (early pain-free mobilisation, progressive loading) works in the right direction; everything that feeds the haematoma or increases local inflammation works the other way.

Two forms of haematoma coexist and they do not behave alike. The intermuscular haematoma spreads between the fascial planes, migrates with gravity, colours the skin within a few days, and resolves quickly. The intramuscular haematoma stays enclosed within the fascial sheath of the muscle: it raises local pressure, restricts the excursion of the muscle, and it is the one that causes trouble. The prospective study by Thorsson et al. measured this difference on ultrasound: lesions appearing as a circumscribed anechoic, hypoechoic or mixed collection normalised more slowly and took longer to heal completely (p = 0.001) than lesions with a diffuse hyperechoic appearance⁵.

Which muscle exactly

The quadriceps occupies the anterior compartment of the thigh: rectus femoris superficially, vastus medialis and vastus lateralis on either side, vastus intermedius flattened against the femoral shaft. A direct anterior impact therefore crushes the deep plane preferentially, which the surgical data confirm: in the series by Rööser et al. on eight thigh compartment syndromes, the haematoma lay in vastus intermedius in four cases and in rectus femoris in three⁸.

For ossification, the most recent systematic review gives a slightly different result. Across 89 published patients, Stammer et al. find the thigh to be the most frequent site and the quadriceps the most affected muscle, but they name vastus lateralis as the head most often involved¹⁵. The radiological series by Saad et al. (68 cases over 13 years in a tertiary orthopaedic centre) points the same way on localisation: 73% of cases in the lower limb, mostly in the quadriceps¹⁶. In other words: the thigh and the quadriceps, yes, without argument; the exact head, the literature does not settle.

How common are thigh contusions in sport, really?

Simple question, partial answer. There is one solid prospective dataset, but it deals with European male professional football, and nothing says it transfers to amateur rugby or to Saturday handball.

The only large prospective cohort

The study by Ueblacker, Müller-Wohlfahrt and Ekstrand, published in 2015 in the British Journal of Sports Medicine, remains the reference: 30 European clubs, 1,981 players followed prospectively from 2001 to 2013, with recording of individual exposure and of every time-loss injury. It counts 2,287 thigh muscle injuries, that is 25% of all injuries; 2,003 were usable, of which 88% were indirect and 12% direct¹.

The detail is more instructive than the percentage. The incidence of indirect injuries is eight times higher: 1.48 per 1,000 hours of exposure against 0.19 (p < 0.01). But the gap closes when you look at the cost: indirect injuries account for 19% of total absence time, direct ones for 1%, and the mean absence is 18.5 days against 7 (p < 0.001). Finally, 76% of direct injuries occur in matches, against 60% of indirect ones, and a foul is involved in 42% of direct injuries, against 2% of indirect ones¹.

The other available sources, and what they weigh

Professional basketball. A study published in February 2026 in BMC Sports Science, Medicine and Rehabilitation characterised quadriceps injuries in the NBA over the 2015 to 2020 seasons: 116 injuries in 89 players, and contusion is the most frequent type. Most of the players missed fewer than ten games. The authors observe a significant fall in player efficiency rating one year after the injury (16.5 before, 15.8 after, p = 0.015), which is no longer significant at two years (16.8, p = 0.166)¹⁷. That is a performance signal, not incidence data: the database used is public and self-declared.

Rugby league. The work of Alonso, Hekeik and Adams followed 100 injured rugby league players in an Australian professional club. This is not an incidence study either, it is a prognostic study, and one of the best we have on this subject, but it does attest in passing that a single club can gather a hundred dead legs¹⁸.

American military academies. Jackson and Feagin counted 65 quadriceps injuries in a single school year in cadets at West Point¹⁹. Ryan et al. counted 117 over three years in the same institution². Aronen et al. gathered 47 cases at the Naval Academy, but over eighteen years³. These populations are young, male, exposed daily to compulsory contact sports, and followed by a single department: that is what makes these series valuable, and it is also what forbids generalising from them.

An injury under-reported by construction

Injury registers count only time-loss injuries. Yet Ueblacker points out that 76% of direct injuries occur in matches, and that the player often carries on playing: the minor dead leg, the one that leaves more than 90° of flexion, never crosses the reporting threshold. The practical consequence is that the 12% in the UEFA cohort is a floor, not an estimate. This point matters for what follows: the clinic physiotherapist mostly sees the dead legs that were not treated on the day, and those are precisely the ones Ryan showed to become complicated more often².

How do you grade a dead leg in three minutes?

With a goniometer and a watch. The severity of a quadriceps contusion is read from active knee flexion measured twelve to twenty-four hours after the impact, not from pain, not from the volume of the thigh, not from the visible haematoma.

The founding measurement, and why it holds

In 1973, Jackson and Feagin published in the Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery the study that still structures management today: 65 quadriceps injuries in cadets, over one school year, classified into three grades. Their central finding is that the degree of flexion limitation matches the severity of the injury, and so does the time lost¹⁹.

The clinical descriptors of the three grades, as Kary's review reports them, attach a functional picture to each range: normal walking and localised tenderness for the minor form above 90°; antalgic limp and a swollen, tender muscle mass between 45 and 90°; marked limp and a clearly swollen mass below 45°²⁰.

Ryan et al. took up these thresholds in 1991, specifying when the measurement is taken, 12 to 24 hours after the injury , and it is that detail which makes the grading reproducible². Measuring on the pitch, in the minute that follows, measures only the shock; measuring at day 3 already measures the treatment.

Breakdown of the 1973 series: 47 minor injuries, 7 moderate, 11 severe, that is 65 in total¹⁹. 1991 series: 117 quadriceps contusions over three years².

The gap between 1973 and 1991 is the real result

A moderate injury kept a cadet out for 33 to 95 days in 1973 and 19 days on average in 1991. Ryan himself explains where the gap comes from: his protocol takes up that of Jackson and Feagin with two major modifications, resting the injured limb in flexion rather than in extension, and favouring early flexion exercises rather than extension exercises². Two positioning decisions, a factor of three to five on time lost.

Five variables predict 64% of the time to return

The only work that has sought to predict recovery time is that of Alonso, Hekeik and Adams, published in 2000 in the Australian Journal of Physiotherapy. Six tests were assessed in 100 rugby league players, all treated with the same standardised programme of cryokinetics and adapted training. Inter-rater reliability of the measurements is good to excellent (0.66 to 1.00). Above all, a multiple regression shows that 64% of the variance in the time to return to full training is explained by five variables¹⁸:

1. the difference in knee flexion between the uninjured and the injured side;
2. the relative firmness of the injured muscle on palpation;
3. the difference in thigh circumference at the suprapatellar border;
4. having been able to carry on playing after the impact;
5. the delay before treatment began.

Four of these five variables are measured with a goniometer, a tape measure and two questions. The fifth, firmness, is the only subjective element, and it is precisely the one whose reliability the study demonstrated. Note too what variable 4 means: "he finished the match" is not reassuring, it is prognostic data.

When should imaging be requested?

Not straight away. Kary's review is explicit: imaging is "typically not necessary" to diagnose a contusion, and becomes useful when the patient presents late, with no known mechanism, or when the course does not follow²⁰. The practical guide to the anterior thigh in footballers, published in 2022 by a group of European club doctors, places ultrasound and MRI on the same level of usefulness for defining the extent, MRI having the advantage of identifying a tendon retraction that would call for surgery²¹.

Two situations change matters and justify imaging:

• Flexion that does not progress, or that regresses, between the third and the twentieth day. That is the window for myositis ossificans: radiographic signs can appear as early as three weeks, but they frequently lag behind the clinical picture²⁰.
• A hard, warm, growing mass. The differential diagnosis with a soft-tissue tumour then arises, and it is dealt with below.

What should be done in the first twenty-four hours?

This is the only moment when a simple decision visibly changes what follows. It comes down to one sentence: put the knee in flexion, and leave it there.

The 120° protocol

The series by Aronen et al., published in 2006 in Clinical Journal of Sport Medicine, is a prospective case series of 47 midshipmen at the United States Naval Academy, recruited between 1987 and 2005 on two strict criteria: declared inability to carry on with the activity at the moment of impact, and inability to perform a pain-free isometric quadriceps contraction with the knee extended together with a straight leg raise. The protocol, instituted within ten minutes of the injury, comes down to three actions³:

1. the knee is flexed passively and painlessly to 120°;
2. it is held there continuously for 24 hours by a hinged brace;
3. at the twenty-fourth hour the brace is removed, and the athlete is instructed to perform active, pain-free self-stretching of the quadriceps several times a day, then pain-free isometric strengthening as soon as possible.

The mean time to return to unrestricted sporting activity was 3.5 days, with a range of 2 to 5 days. Of the first 23 cases X-rayed at 3 and 6 months, only one developed myositis ossificans³.

This result has to be read for what it is: a descriptive case series, without a control group, in a young and closely supervised military population, with an intervention within ten minutes that no private practice can reproduce. The authors themselves put their conclusion cautiously: holding at 120° appears to shorten the time to return by comparison with the figures published in other studies. It is not a direct comparison.

The idea nonetheless remains consistent with the pathophysiology and with Ryan's result. A quadriceps held under tension by knee flexion offers less room to the haematoma; a quadriceps rested in extension offers it more, and then demands that the lost range be won back. That is exactly the modification Ryan introduced between 1973 and 1991, with the effect we have seen².

Immediate compression: measured, and without effect

It is the action everyone performs and no one has validated. Thorsson et al. tested it in 1997 in 40 athletes with a contusion or strain of the thigh or calf, followed to complete healing by range measurement, creatine kinase assay and ultrasound. Nineteen injuries received a maximal compression bandage applied in under five minutes (mean: two minutes); twenty-one were treated with rest and elevation alone⁵.

Result: no significant difference, nor in the time to complete subjective recovery, nor in the ultrasound size of the lesion, nor in the time to normalisation of the image. The study was not randomised and its numbers are modest, but it is the only one to have asked the question in real pitchside conditions, and its answer is negative.

Two secondary results from this work are worth knowing. First, contusions heal faster than strains: 19 ± 9 days against 26 ± 22 days (p = 0.02), which matches the 7 against 18.5 days of the UEFA cohort fifteen years later. Second, creatine kinase values and loss of range were not correlated with the severity of the trauma, whereas range showed a weak correlation with the ultrasound size of the haematoma (r = 0.42; p < 0.01)⁵. In other words: do not request CK, and remember that range measures the lesion imperfectly, it is the least bad indicator available, not a perfect one.

Ice: little evidence, no reason to go without

The systematic review by Bleakley, McDonough and MacAuley gathered 22 randomised trials on cryotherapy in acute soft-tissue injury. The mean PEDro score is 3.4 out of 10. The authors conclude that there is marginal evidence in favour of combining ice with exercise, little evidence that adding ice to compression changes anything, and above all they note that few studies have dealt with closed injuries and that none establishes an optimal mode or duration²².

There is therefore no ice protocol justified by the data. What remains defensible is modest: apply cold for as long as it relieves, do not let it delay getting into flexion, and do not credit it with an effect on the haematoma that nothing demonstrates.

What about anti-inflammatories?

The question is an old one and poorly settled. Kary reports that non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, and indometacin in particular for at least seven days, have been proposed to prevent myositis ossificans after severe quadriceps contusion²⁰. That is an inherited practice, not a practice demonstrated in this indication.

The most recent meta-analysis on indometacin, published in 2024, covers 665 patients across randomised trials: it concludes that there is a significant reduction in Brooker grade I-II heterotopic ossification, but not in grades III-IV, with significantly more frequent gastrointestinal adverse effects²³. The crucial point is that these trials deal with heterotopic ossification after surgery or joint trauma , hip replacement, acetabular fracture, elbow trauma, and not with sports muscle contusions. Transposing the result would be an extrapolation, and it has to be named as such.

In practice, prescribing is a matter for the doctor, and the reasonable position is this: there is no trial demonstrating that an anti-inflammatory prevents myositis ossificans after a dead leg. The Nature Reviews Disease Primers review sums up the general situation of drug treatments in muscle injuries: numerous, often proposed, and backed by very limited evidence of efficacy¹².

What rehabilitation, and at what level of evidence?

The honest answer comes down to one sentence: rehabilitation of the dead leg rests almost entirely on pathophysiological reasoning and case series. This chapter shows that modality by modality, rather than hiding it behind a list of exercises.

Three phases, two criteria for moving on

The structure described by Kary is simple and has not been challenged since²⁰:

1. Protection phase (24 hours). Knee in flexion, no painful weight-bearing, no stretching.
2. Active phase. It begins "when pain-free active flexion of at least 120° is reached". Pain-free active range repeated through the day, gentle stretching taken to the point of discomfort but never to pain, isometric quadriceps strengthening.
3. Functional phase. Progressive return to fitness, sport-specific movements, then complete field tests.

The two criteria for moving on are therefore ranges and not time frames: 120° of pain-free active flexion to enter the active phase, then 120° with the hip in extension plus functional tests without limitation for return²⁰. That is good news for the physiotherapist: the patient is his own stopwatch.

The 120° threshold appears three times in this condition: it is the immobilisation angle for the first 24 hours, it is the threshold for entering the active phase, and it is the return criterion. It also appears by implication among the five factors associated with myositis ossificans, since flexion below 120° is one of them.

A recent theoretical foothold

The Nature Reviews Disease Primers review of 2023 formulates the paradigm shift of the last five years: management of muscle injuries has moved from rest, immobilisation and initial overprotection towards early activation and progressive loading¹². That review deals with muscle trauma as a whole, contusion included, and its message aligns with the logic of Ryan's protocol: early flexion rather than protective extension.

But be careful not to over-interpret. "Early activation" does not mean "early stretching", and certainly not "early forced stretching": on a contusion, aggressive stretching is exactly the action Kary says must never go beyond discomfort²⁰, and it is a plausible candidate, though not a demonstrated one, for the formation of an ossification.

The table of modalities by level of evidence

What is myositis ossificans, and in whom does it occur?

It is the complication that gives the dead leg its clinical interest. Bone forms where there is none: inside the bruised muscle. The name is misleading, there is neither myositis in the inflammatory sense nor systemic disease, but a benign and most often self-limiting heterotopic ossification.

An ossification, not an inflammation

The clearest definition is that of the EFORT review: "a benign bone formation in an extraskeletal location", whose most frequent subtype, post-traumatic, typically occurs in the young man after trauma or a sporting injury²⁸. The 2025 French-language review published in the Revue Médicale Suisse describes it as a benign heterotopic ossification of the young athlete, occurring most often after muscle trauma, and evolving through three phases with distinct clinical and radiological features²⁹.

The practical consequence is twofold. First, it is not an inflammatory disease: anti-inflammatories have no demonstrated indication once the ossification is established. Second, it is a process that matures , and maturation changes everything that follows, from radiological diagnosis to the indication for surgery.

What is its frequency after a dead leg, really?

Three figures circulate and they have to be told apart, because they do not count the same thing.

A fourth value is worth quoting because it is the one the reviews quote: Kary reports, drawing on Beiner and Jokl as well as on Ryan, an incidence "between 9 and 17%" after contusion²⁰. That is the range a peer-reviewed review states, not "9 to 20%".

Ryan's five associated factors

The West Point series is the only one to have looked for associated factors in a homogeneous population of quadriceps contusions. Ryan et al. identify five²:

Who develops myositis ossificans, all causes combined

Three recent counts give the demographic picture, and they agree on the essentials.

• Stammer et al., 2025 , a systematic review of the 1972-2020 literature: 77 articles, 89 patients. Mean age 26.2 years (13 weeks to 72 years), 65.2% men. The lower limb is more affected than the upper limb and the spine, the thigh is the most frequent site, the quadriceps the most affected muscle, vastus lateralis the head most often involved¹⁵.
• Saad et al., 2021 , 68 cases recorded over 13 years in the radiology databases of a British tertiary orthopaedic centre. Mean age 36 years (4 to 84 years), 73% in the lower limb, mostly in the quadriceps¹⁶.
• Cherry et al., 2023 , a scoping review of the paediatric population: 60 cases published between 2002 and 2023, mean age at diagnosis 9.5 years, sex ratio 1:1. The figure to remember: the diagnosis initially suspected was a neoplasm in 21.7% of the children, and surgical excision was the first-line treatment in 46.7% of cases³⁰.

These three series do not measure an incidence: they describe cases that were published or imaged, which selects atypical forms and forms that posed a diagnostic problem. Their value lies elsewhere: they say where to look, in whom, and above all what to beware of, confusion with a tumour.

How do you recognise myositis ossificans, and how do you monitor it?

Diagnosis is a problem of timing before it is a problem of imaging. Too early, the image looks like a tumour; at the right moment, it becomes characteristic. Knowing how to wait is a medical act here.

The clinical picture that should raise the alarm

The scenario is stereotyped: a moderate or severe dead leg, initial improvement, then a plateau or a regression of flexion between the second and the sixth week, with a hard, tender, sometimes warm mass palpable in the body of the quadriceps. Pain no longer follows the expected curve and range no longer progresses despite correct rehabilitation.

Two published cases illustrate this delay. In a 27-year-old professional footballer, myositis of vastus intermedius was suspected four weeks after a severe contusion, on the basis of progressive pain and loss of range resistant to conservative treatment³¹. In a 20-year-old semi-professional rugby player, the diagnosis came nine weeks after a severe quadriceps contusion, on the same picture³². In a third case, a young footballer was diagnosed six weeks after an injury to the right thigh, but it was a strain and not a contusion, which is a reminder that myositis ossificans is not the preserve of direct impact³³.

The timeline of imaging

The imaging review published in 2026 in Muscles describes three phases with precise time markers: an early phase from 0 to 4 weeks, itself divided into an acute inflammatory stage from 0 to 1 week and a subacute stage from 1 to 4 weeks, an intermediate phase from 4 to 8 weeks, and a mature phase beyond 8 weeks³⁴.

The zonal phenomenon, and the osteosarcoma trap

The signature of myositis ossificans is its concentric organisation, described as a zonal phenomenon in three layers: at the centre, immature non-ossified fibroblastic tissue mixed with necrotic debris; in the intermediate zone, osteoid and immature bone; at the periphery, well-organised mature lamellar bone. Maturation therefore progresses from the centre towards the periphery, and a well-defined peripheral cortex becomes visible in 6 to 8 weeks³⁴.

That is exactly the opposite of an extraskeletal osteosarcoma, whose calcification is centrifugal, from the centre towards the periphery, with disorganised peripheral calcification. Three other differences help: the osteosarcoma shows infiltrating margins with soft-tissue invasion, perilesional oedema that persists or increases whereas it gradually decreases in myositis, and central or diffuse heterogeneous enhancement where myositis enhances as a peripheral ring³⁴.

The risk of error is not theoretical. The EFORT review on post-traumatic myositis ossificans is titled, bluntly, "a benign lesion that simulates malignant bone and soft tissue tumours", and points out that in the early phase both imaging and histology can be non-characteristic²⁸. In paediatrics, a neoplasm was the diagnosis initially suspected in 21.7% of the 60 published cases³⁰.

Monitoring without irradiating

Ultrasound is the most suitable follow-up tool, and this is a point on which the recent French-language literature and the Brest series agree. Simon et al. based their diagnosis on two ultrasound criteria in the context of recent muscle trauma: the presence of intramuscular ossification or calcification on axial and longitudinal B-mode views, and hyperactivity on power Doppler around that ossification⁶. The review in the Revue Médicale Suisse likewise concludes that the three phases "make ultrasound follow-up particularly useful"²⁹.

How is myositis ossificans treated, and when should surgery be considered?

The best-documented answer is the one that costs least: do nothing specific, carry on with rehabilitation, and monitor with ultrasound. The published outcome is better than the apparent severity suggests.

The Brest series: watchful waiting works

Simon, Guillodo, Madouas and Saraux followed, between 2006 and 2012, the cases of myositis ossificans diagnosed in a sports medicine practice and a rheumatology department. Of 22 cases, 19 were of traumatic origin on a recent muscle injury and were included, with clinical and treatment data collected at inclusion, at 6 months and at 1 year⁶.

The result is clear: 89.5% of the patients had resumed light physical activity at 3 months, and all of them at 10 months; 89.5% had regained their previous level at 6 months, and all of them at 12 months. The conclusion of the authors deserves to be quoted in spirit: watchful waiting and the persistence of the ossification do not appear to be unfavourable factors for return to sport at the previous level, under ultrasound monitoring⁶.

What the recent French-language literature recommends

The review published in July 2025 in the Revue Médicale Suisse sums up management in four points: prevention rests on early management of muscle injuries and haematomas; treatment remains conservative, centred on physiotherapy; focused shockwaves may be added to it; surgery is considered only in case of persistent discomfort beyond six months²⁹.

This six-month threshold is not arbitrary. It corresponds to the moment when, according to the 2026 imaging review, the calcified mass shrinks and separates more readily from the underlying bone, consolidation being accompanied by a gradual improvement in symptoms and function³⁴. To operate before that is to resect an immature lesion in a muscle that is still inflamed.

Shockwaves: a signal, not proof

It is the only active modality for which a series exists. Buselli et al. treated 24 athletes with three sessions of electrohydraulic shockwaves combined with a rehabilitation programme. The result is instructive in two ways: radiography showed only a partial reduction of the ossification, but all the patients showed functional improvement immediately after the therapy; at two months range was normal and without weakness, and 87.5% had resumed their regular sporting activity at three months²⁷.

There is no control group. Yet we have just seen that, with no treatment at all, 89.5% of the Brest patients had resumed light activity at 3 months. The two series do not measure exactly the same thing, but the overlap of the figures invites caution: nothing today allows the favourable course we observe anyway to be attributed to the shockwaves.

A single case points the same way, only faster: a 20-year-old rugby player, treated with three sessions of shockwaves over two weeks combined with an unsupervised exercise programme, recovered pain and range within two weeks and resumed specific activity at four weeks³². One case demonstrates nothing, but it documents that a short protocol is feasible.

Early surgery: a documented exception

A case published in 2025 in the Journal of Sport Rehabilitation proposes the opposite of the six-month rule. A 27-year-old professional footballer, symptomatic one month after a severe contusion and refractory to conservative treatment, underwent an early surgical excision of the myositis of vastus intermedius. He was asymptomatic two months after the operation and returned to competition three months after the initial injury³¹.

This case deserves to be known and must not become a rule. It concerns a professional athlete whose calendar is not that of a private-practice patient, it is unique, and it stands squarely against the consensus described above. The reasonable reading is that there are situations in which waiting six months is not sustainable, and that those situations call for a specialist surgical decision, not for a default choice.

And manual therapy?

A Japanese case published in September 2025 in Cureus describes ultrasound-guided manual therapy for limitation of knee flexion secondary to a quadriceps contusion with heterotopic ossification³⁵. It is a single case, and it founds no recommendation. It is quoted here for two reasons: it shows that the question of residual stiffness remains open in 2025, and it illustrates the use of ultrasound no longer merely as a follow-up tool but as a guide to the procedure.

When should thigh compartment syndrome be feared?

It is the rare complication, and the only one that can cost a limb. It deserves a chapter of its own not because it is frequent, but because the physiotherapist is sometimes the first, and sometimes the only person, to see the patient again within twenty-four hours.

A documented rarity

Rarity is attested by the literature itself. In 1990, Klasson and Vander Schilden noted that only eight cases of thigh compartment syndrome after isolated closed trauma without fracture had been reported to that date, and added two more, both due to an intramuscular haematoma after a low-energy closed impact and treated by emergency fasciotomy⁷.

More broadly, the series by Kanlic et al. places thigh compartment syndrome at less than 0.3% of trauma patients: 23 patients and 26 compartments decompressed in eight years across two level 1 centres each admitting more than 2,000 trauma cases a year⁹.

What delay costs

The picture in athletes: two series and two recent cases

Rööser, Bengtson and Hägglund reported in 1991 eight patients who developed an anterior compartment syndrome after contusion or muscle rupture of the anterior thigh. All had raised pressure in the quadriceps, between 41 and 80 mmHg. At fasciotomy, the haematoma lay in vastus intermedius in four cases, in rectus femoris in three, and a single case showed only oedema of the anterior compartment. Relief was immediate in all of them, and all had normal function after about four weeks. The authors recommend broad indications for fasciotomy and evacuation of the haematoma⁸.

Two recent cases show that the situation still occurs, and how fast it evolves:

• O'Toole, Hale and Scarcella, 2024. An American football player aged 17 years presents the following morning after a direct impact on the anterior thigh, with intractable pain and pain on small-arc movement. Diagnosis of acute compartment syndrome, fasciotomy, return to sport at four months³⁶.
• Correia et al., 2024. A man aged 19 years presents to the emergency department with severe and progressive pain in the left thigh 24 hours after a direct trauma at football. Intracompartmental pressure measurement confirms the diagnosis, on a large intramuscular haematoma with no other contributing factor. Closure of the incisions by the shoelace technique, excellent functional outcome³⁷.

These two observations share a point that is crucial in practice: the picture did not declare itself on the pitch, it declared itself the next day. That is precisely the moment when the athlete consults his physiotherapist rather than the match doctor.

What the physiotherapist should take from these figures

Two ideas, and they do not point the same way, which is precisely the problem.

The first: it is rare. Ten published cases of compartment syndrome after isolated closed trauma without fracture at the time of Klasson's review⁷, less than 0.3% of trauma patients in Kanlic⁹. A physiotherapist can work a whole career without seeing one.

The second: when it does occur, delay decides everything. A third of Kanlic's patients already had ischaemic muscle at the time of opening, and half of them were amputated⁹. Conversely, the eight patients of Rööser, operated on broad indications, all recovered normal function within four weeks⁸.

The course of action that follows from these two facts is not anxious monitoring: it is a low alert threshold and immediate referral when it is crossed. A dead leg that hurts more and more, in a thigh that is hardening, is not a dead leg doing badly, it is a surgical hypothesis until proved otherwise.

When can sport be resumed, and on what criteria?

On criteria, not on a time frame. It is the one point on which the literature of this condition has been stable for thirty years, and it is also the one that best protects the patient against recurrence.

The central criterion: 120°

The most direct formulation dates from 1992, from the pen of Aronen and Chronister: the determining factor for sending the patient back to play safely is whether he has recovered 120° or more of knee flexion⁴. Kary specifies the examination and adds to it: the athlete must be pain-free, reach 120° of flexion with the hip in extension, and complete all the field functional tests without limitation²⁰.

The qualifier "with the hip in extension" is not decorative. Rectus femoris is biarticular: measuring knee flexion with the hip flexed slackens it and overestimates the range available in the sporting movement, which combines precisely hip extension and knee flexion, the running stride, the plant, the kick.

Kary adds a third condition, often forgotten in the clinic: a thigh guard is recommended before return to sport, to reduce recurrence²⁰. That is consistent with Ryan's data, where previous quadriceps injury is one of the five factors associated with myositis ossificans².

The published times, and why they diverge so much

The systematic review by Haws et al., published in 2017 in the Journal of ISAKOS, is the best available survey. It searched PubMed and SPORTDiscus to compare non-surgical and surgical treatment of thigh haematomas in athletes, taking time to return to sport as the primary outcome. Seven studies met the inclusion criteria, all of level of evidence IV; six dealt with non-operative treatment, only one with a surgical procedure, and that one reported no time to return. The mean time to return to play after conservative treatment comes out at 29.3 days, with a range of 2 to 180 days. The authors conclude that it is unknown whether operative treatment would allow an earlier return, and that this figure should serve as a benchmark for expectation when treating conservatively¹⁰.

That range of 2 to 180 days is the real lesson. It does not reflect the imprecision of a measurement: it reflects the fact that "thigh contusion" covers both a minor injury treated within the minute and a severe injury neglected for three days. Announcing a time frame to a patient without having graded the injury therefore means announcing a number drawn from a range of one to ninety.

What return really costs, further down the line

Two series allow us to go beyond the time frame alone.

In the UEFA cohort, direct thigh injuries account for 1% of the total absence time of the squads, against 19% for indirect injuries¹. At club level, the dead leg is therefore a minor organisational problem, which probably explains the scant attention research gives it.

At player level, the 2026 NBA study qualifies that picture. Across 116 quadriceps injuries in 89 players, of which contusion is the most frequent type, most missed fewer than ten games. But the measured efficiency of the player fell significantly one year after the injury, player efficiency rating of 16.5 before against 15.8 after, p = 0.015, returning to baseline at two years (16.8, p = 0.166). Older age was associated with a relative risk of a fall in usage rate of 0.83 (95% CI: 0.76-0.90) and in player efficiency rating of 0.75 (95% CI: 0.64-0.88) at one year¹⁷.

This result has to be read with its limits: it rests on a public database, it does not distinguish contusions from strains in the performance analysis, and a fall in efficiency can have many causes other than an injury. It does nevertheless suggest that "return" and "return to level" are not synonymous, and that the second season counts as much as the first.

The view from modern imaging

The narrative review published in 2025 in the British Journal of Radiology covers the whole spectrum of quadriceps injury in the athlete: strains, tears, avulsions, contusions, injuries from degloving, exercise-related signal abnormalities, and points out that knowing these appearances is aimed at ensuring a safe and rapid return, at limiting the risk of recurrence and of long-term sequelae¹¹. None of the recent reviews identified for this article proposes a return criterion that would replace the 1992 one. That is information about the state of the field as much as about the condition.

The figures in circulation on this subject: which ones hold?

This chapter does not exist in the other articles on the dead leg, and that is precisely why it is here. Several percentages are repeated from page to page without anyone going back to their origin. We have done so, line by line, and the result is not what you would expect.

Why so many orphan figures on this particular subject?

Because research has left it. A bibliometric analysis published in 2024 in EFORT Open Reviews sifted through 1,280 articles on myositis ossificans published between 1993 and 2022. Its conclusion on research themes is unambiguous: the hot topics have moved from traumatic myositis ossificans and its clinical management towards the genetic aetiology, pathogenesis and treatment of fibrodysplasia ossificans progressiva³⁸.

In other words, scientific energy has shifted from the athlete's complication to a rare genetic disease. Post-traumatic myositis ossificans has been left with the data it had, that of the 1970s to 1990s, and the figures of that era have been copied ever since.

What 2023-2026 actually brought

The subject is not dead for all that, and it would be wrong to write that it is. Here is what the last three years have produced, and what it is worth:

• A reference review on muscle trauma (Nature Reviews Disease Primers, 2023) which sets out the paradigm shift towards early activation and progressive loading, and which points out that most of the medical treatments proposed rest on very limited evidence¹².
• An imaging review of the athlete's quadriceps (British Journal of Radiology, 2025), which covers the whole spectrum of injury¹¹.
• A stage-by-stage imaging review of myositis ossificans (Muscles, April 2026), which at last gives precise time markers and a method for distinguishing it from osteosarcoma³⁴.
• A French-language review (Revue Médicale Suisse, July 2025), which sets the surgical threshold at six months²⁹.
• An anatomical systematic review (Clinical Anatomy, 2025) which challenges the traumatic share of the published cases of myositis¹⁵.
• A paediatric scoping review (Frontiers in Pediatrics, 2023) which documents the most dangerous diagnostic error³⁰.
• An epidemiological study in the NBA (February 2026) which confirms contusion as the leading quadriceps injury in these athletes¹⁷.
• A randomised trial (2024) on photobiomodulation, the only randomised trial of the period, but on induced contusions in 46 healthy volunteers²⁴.
• Three case reports: two compartment syndromes in footballers^36,37 and one early surgical excision of myositis³¹.

What do concrete clinical cases teach us?

Six published observations, all identifiable by their PMID. None has been invented or recomposed for the sake of demonstration. Taken together, they map the real timetable of the complications, the one that pooled series erase.

Three lessons these cases give that the series do not

Compartment syndrome arrives the next day, not on the pitch

The two observations from 2024 share the same chronology: an impact during the match, then a worsening in the twenty-four hours that follow. Correia's patient presents to the emergency department 24 hours after the trauma, O'Toole's presents the following morning with intractable pain^36,37. That window is exactly the one of the first physiotherapy appointment after a weekend injury.

The consequence is direct: at the first contact with a patient who took a dead leg the day before, the question to ask is not "what range?" but first of all "is it better or worse than yesterday?". A contusion that worsens within 24 hours has no physiological reason to do so.

Myositis ossificans declares itself between the fourth and the ninth week

Four weeks for the professional footballer³¹, six for the young player in the Portuguese case³³, nine for the rugby player³². That window matches precisely the intermediate and mature phases described by the 2026 imaging review³⁴, and it explains an observation often made in practice: the patient we thought was cured comes back for advice after having stopped his sessions.

A follow-up appointment scheduled at six weeks after a moderate or severe dead leg is therefore nothing excessive, even if the patient is well at three weeks.

Myositis ossificans does not call for the same answer in everyone

Compare the two most contrasting cases. The 20-year-old rugby player was treated with shockwaves and unsupervised exercises, with a return to specific activity in four weeks³². The 27-year-old professional footballer was operated on one month after the injury, against the consensus that recommends waiting six months, with a return to match play at three months^31,29.

Neither of them establishes a rule. What they show together is that the decision depends on functional tolerance and on the patient's calendar more than on the image, and that meets the conclusion of the Brest series, where the persistence of the ossification did not prevent a return to the previous level⁶.

How do you apply all this concretely in practice?

This chapter contains nothing new: it reorders what precedes in the order in which the patient arrives.

First contact, on the day or the day after

1. One question before any measurement: "better or worse than yesterday?" Worsening within 24 hours is not part of the course of a contusion. It is the window of the two compartment syndromes published in 2024^36,37.
2. Palpate the anterior compartment. A thigh that is tight and swollen as a block is the sign most consistently found before surgical decompression⁹. Together with increasing disproportionate pain and pain on passive stretch, it demands immediate referral, not a session.
3. Measure active knee flexion with a goniometer, noting the time elapsed since the impact. Above 90°: minor. Between 45 and 90°: moderate. Below 45°: severe^2,20.
4. Measure thigh circumference at the suprapatellar border, on both sides. It is one of the five variables in Alonso's prognostic model¹⁸.
5. Ask whether the patient was able to finish the match, and how many days he has been in pain. Those two answers are prognostic variables too, and the delay before treatment is moreover one of the five factors associated with myositis ossificans^2,18.

What goes in the notes

The session, phase by phase

What to tell the patient

• On the time frame: "your knee decides, not the calendar". Then, once the injury has been graded, an order of magnitude: the published mean is 29.3 days, the range runs from 2 to 180 days depending on severity and on how quickly treatment starts¹⁰.
• On the resting position: knee flexed, not straight. It is counter-intuitive and it is the most useful instruction of the first hours^2,3.
• On the return to play: premature return is not only a risk of relapse, it is one of the five factors associated with myositis ossificans².
• On myositis ossificans, if it occurs: nine athletes out of ten had regained their previous level at six months in the French series, all of them at twelve months, without specific treatment and with the ossification still visible⁶.
• On what we do not know: no treatment modality for the dead leg reaches a high or moderate level of evidence. Saying so does not weaken the management, it gives it its proper status.

To go further on the site

Three articles on the site extend this one to neighbouring injuries of the athlete's lower limb: stress fracture in the athlete, which shares with the dead leg the difficulty of differential diagnosis when thigh or leg pain does not settle; proximal hamstring tendinopathy, the posterior and indirect side of thigh injury; and patellar tendinopathy, for the rest of the knee extensor chain.

Frequently asked questions

The questions patients ask, and the answers the literature really allows.

How long does a thigh dead leg last?

It depends on severity and on how quickly treatment starts, to a degree that makes any average answer misleading. The reference systematic review reports 29.3 days on average for conservative treatment, with a range running from 2 to 180 days¹⁰. In professional football, the mean absence after a direct thigh injury is 7 days¹. With immobilisation at 120° of flexion started within ten minutes, a series of 47 athletes reports a return in 3.5 days on average³. Conversely, under a rest-in-extension protocol, the severe cases in the 1973 series ran up to 180 days¹⁹.

How do you know whether a dead leg is serious?

By measuring active knee flexion 12 to 24 hours after the impact. Above 90°, the injury is minor; between 45 and 90°, it is moderate; below 45°, it is severe^2,20. Neither the pain felt nor the size of the visible haematoma replaces this measurement, and creatine kinase levels have not proved to be correlated with the severity of the trauma⁵.

Should ice be applied to a dead leg?

It will do no harm, but the evidence is thin. The reference systematic review on cryotherapy in acute soft-tissue injury retained 22 randomised trials, with a mean methodological quality score of 3.4 out of 10, few studies dealing with closed injuries, and no data establishing an optimal mode or duration²². What matters in the first hours is not the cold: it is positioning the knee in flexion³.

Should the thigh be compressed straight away?

It is the reflex action, and it has been tested. In a prospective study of 40 athletes, a maximal compression bandage applied in under five minutes reduced neither the ultrasound size of the haematoma, nor the time to normalisation of the image, nor the time to complete healing, compared with rest and elevation alone⁵. The study was not randomised and its numbers were modest, but it is the only one to have asked the question in field conditions.

Can a muscle contusion be massaged?

No study for or against was identified. The usual caution rests on pathophysiological reasoning: the prognosis of a dead leg depends on the volume of the intramuscular haematoma^5,14, and firm massage over the point of impact in the acute phase has no demonstrated benefit to set against that theoretical risk. In practice, the session is better spent on pain-free active range of motion, whose benefit is consistent with the available data.

What is myositis ossificans, and is it serious?

It is a benign heterotopic ossification: bone forms inside the bruised muscle. The name is misleading, it is neither muscle inflammation nor a systemic disease^28,29. The prognosis is good: in a French series of 19 traumatic cases followed by ultrasound and without specific treatment, 89.5% of the athletes had regained their previous level at 6 months and all of them at 12 months, despite the ossification persisting on imaging⁶.

When should an X-ray be taken after a blow to the thigh?

Not straight away: imaging is generally not needed to diagnose a contusion²⁰. It becomes useful if flexion stalls or regresses between the second and the sixth week, or if a hard mass becomes palpable. Watch the timing: radiographic signs can appear as early as the third week but frequently lag behind the clinical picture²⁰, and it is in the early phase that the image most resembles a tumour^28,34. An image taken too soon worries without concluding.

Can you play again with a dead leg?

Three conditions must be met, and none of them is a time frame: being pain-free, reaching 120° of knee flexion with the hip in extension, and completing the field functional tests without limitation^4,20. A thigh guard is recommended on return in order to limit recurrence²⁰. Carrying on playing after the impact is not trivial: it is one of the five variables that predict the time to full training¹⁸.

Can a dead leg leave lasting damage?

In the founding 1973 series, despite periods of disability running up to 180 days and many cases of myositis ossificans, no patient was left with permanent disability¹⁹. The sequelae reported are mainly functional and transient: stiffness, strength deficit, discomfort at full flexion. A 2026 study of NBA players nevertheless observes a significant fall in measured efficiency one year after a quadriceps injury, back to baseline at two years¹⁷.

How can a dead leg be prevented?

Three levers have support in the data. The wearing of a thigh guard, recommended on return after a first injury²⁰. The application of the laws of the game: a foul is involved in 42% of direct thigh injuries in professional football, against 2% of indirect injuries¹. And the early management of muscle injuries and haematomas, which is the basis of myositis ossificans prevention according to the 2025 French-language review²⁹ , something the "treatment delay of more than 3 days" factor of Ryan confirms by implication².

Does an anti-inflammatory prevent myositis ossificans?

That has not been demonstrated in this indication. Anti-inflammatories, and indometacin in particular, have long been proposed after severe contusion²⁰, but the available randomised trials deal with heterotopic ossification after surgery or joint trauma , hip, acetabulum, elbow. In that setting, the most recent meta-analysis concludes that efficacy is limited to Brooker grades I-II, with significantly more frequent gastrointestinal adverse effects²³. No trial has assessed this prevention after a sports muscle contusion. Prescribing is a matter for the doctor.

Should myositis ossificans be operated on?

Rarely, and not before six months. The 2025 French-language review reserves surgery for cases of persistent discomfort beyond six months²⁹, which corresponds to the point when the calcified mass shrinks and separates more readily from the bone³⁴. A case published in 2025 reports a successful early excision at one month in a professional footballer refractory to conservative treatment, with a return to match play at three months³¹ , but it is a single observation, in a professional setting, and it does not overturn the rule.

References

Thirty-eight references, all verified on PubMed or CrossRef at the time of writing. The identifiers are clickable. Where a piece of data comes from a study whose population differs from the subject of this article, post-surgical heterotopic ossification, hamstring strain, high-energy trauma, the difference is flagged in the text at the point where the figure is quoted.

1. Ueblacker P, Müller-Wohlfahrt HW, Ekstrand J. Epidemiological and clinical outcome comparison of indirect ('strain') versus direct ('contusion') anterior and posterior thigh muscle injuries in male elite football players: UEFA Elite League study of 2287 thigh injuries (2001-2013). Br J Sports Med 2015;49(22):1461-5. PMID 25755277 · doi
2. Ryan JB, Wheeler JH, Hopkinson WJ, Arciero RA, Kolakowski KR. Quadriceps contusions. West Point update. Am J Sports Med 1991;19(3):299-304. PMID 1867338 · doi
3. Aronen JG, Garrick JG, Chronister RD, McDevitt ER. Quadriceps contusions: clinical results of immediate immobilization in 120 degrees of knee flexion. Clin J Sport Med 2006;16(5):383-7. PMID 17016112 · doi
4. Aronen JG, Chronister RD. Quadriceps Contusions. Phys Sportsmed 1992;20(7):130-6. PMID 29281411 · doi
5. Thorsson O, Lilja B, Nilsson P, Westlin N. Immediate external compression in the management of an acute muscle injury. Scand J Med Sci Sports 1997;7(3):182-90. PMID 9200324
6. Simon T, Guillodo Y, Madouas G, Saraux A. Myositis ossificans traumatica (circumscripta) and return to sport: A retrospective series of 19 cases. Joint Bone Spine 2016;83(4):416-20. PMID 26934992
7. Klasson SC, Vander Schilden JL. Acute anterior thigh compartment syndrome complicating quadriceps hematoma. Two case reports and review of the literature. Orthop Rev 1990;19(5):421-7. PMID 2188198
8. Rööser B, Bengtson S, Hägglund G. Acute compartment syndrome from anterior thigh muscle contusion: a report of eight cases. J Orthop Trauma 1991;5(1):57-9. PMID 2023045
9. Kanlic EM, Pinski SE, Verwiebe EG, Saller J, Smith WR. Acute morbidity and complications of thigh compartment syndrome: A report of 26 cases. Patient Saf Surg 2010;4(1):13. PMID 20723263
10. Haws BE, Luo TD, Al'Khafaji IM, Rogers JP, Botros DB, Freehill MT. Definitive management of thigh contusions in athletes: but how definitive? A systematic review. Journal of ISAKOS 2017;2(2):67-74. doi:10.1136/jisakos-2016-000107
11. Ariyaratne SP, Shirodkar K, Botchu R, James SLJ. Quadriceps muscle injuries in athletes: a narrative review. Br J Radiol 2025;98(1169):630-9. PMID 39989034
12. Edouard P, Reurink G, Mackey AL, Lieber RL, Pizzari T, Järvinen TAH, Gronwald T, Hollander K. Traumatic muscle injury. Nat Rev Dis Primers 2023;9(1):56. PMID 37857686
13. Mueller-Wohlfahrt HW, Haensel L, Mithoefer K, et al. Terminology and classification of muscle injuries in sport: the Munich consensus statement. Br J Sports Med 2013;47(6):342-50. PMID 23080315 Level of evidence V, expert opinion.
14. Beiner JM, Jokl P. Muscle contusion injury and myositis ossificans traumatica. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2002;(403 Suppl):S110-9. PMID 12394459
15. Stammer A, Ashwood N, Amara V, Suryawanshi S, Wilson P, Dekker A. The anatomical basis for surgical intervention in myositis ossificans – A systematic review. Clin Anat 2025;38(6):635-48. PMID 39623749
16. Saad A, Azzopardi C, Patel A, Davies AM, Botchu R. Myositis ossificans revisited – The largest reported case series. J Clin Orthop Trauma 2021;17:123-7. PMID 33816108
17. Parmar RP, Tummala SV, Morikawa L, Buckner-Petty S, Chhabra A. Characterization of quadriceps muscle injuries in National Basketball Association athletes and effects on player performance following injury. BMC Sports Sci Med Rehabil 2026;18(1):221. PMID 41709337
18. Alonso A, Hekeik P, Adams R. Predicting a recovery time from the initial assessment of a quadriceps contusion injury. Aust J Physiother 2000;46(3):167-77. PMID 11676801
19. Jackson DW, Feagin JA. Quadriceps contusions in young athletes. Relation of severity of injury to treatment and prognosis. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1973;55(1):95-105. PMID 4691666 Predates the indexing of abstracts in MEDLINE: the abstract can be consulted at the publisher.
20. Kary JM. Diagnosis and management of quadriceps strains and contusions. Curr Rev Musculoskelet Med 2010;3(1-4):26-31. PMID 21063497 · PMC2941577
21. Lempainen L, Mechó S, Valle X, et al. Management of anterior thigh injuries in soccer players: practical guide. BMC Sports Sci Med Rehabil 2022;14(1):41. PMID 35303927
22. Bleakley C, McDonough S, MacAuley D. The use of ice in the treatment of acute soft-tissue injury: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials. Am J Sports Med 2004;32(1):251-61. PMID 14754753
23. Wen L, Chen C, Deng Y, Chen G. Effectiveness of indomethacin in preventing heterotopic ossification: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. J Orthop Surg Res 2024;19(1):589. PMID 39342298 Population: post-surgical heterotopic ossification, not muscle contusion.
24. Wells A, Rigby J, Castel C, Castel D. Pulsed red and blue photobiomodulation for the treatment of thigh contusions and soft tissue injury: a randomized controlled trial. J Sport Rehabil 2024;33(1):20-6. PMID 37917978 Induced contusion in 46 healthy volunteers.
25. Sheth U, Dwyer T, Smith I, et al. Does platelet-rich plasma lead to earlier return to sport when compared with conservative treatment in acute muscle injuries? A systematic review and meta-analysis. Arthroscopy 2018;34(1):281-8. PMID 28800920 Population: grade I-II strains, not contusion.
26. Nakagawa H, Krochmal P, Thomas I, et al. Effects of percutaneous platelet-rich plasma injection on return-to-play after acute hamstring muscle injury: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Br J Sports Med 2026;60(5):370-8. PMID 41708276 Population: hamstrings, not contusion.
27. Buselli P, Coco V, Notarnicola A, et al. Shock waves in the treatment of post-traumatic myositis ossificans. Ultrasound Med Biol 2010;36(3):397-409. PMID 20133043
28. Savvidou O, Papakonstantinou O, Lakiotaki E, Melissaridou D, Korkolopoulou P, Papagelopoulos PJ. Post-traumatic myositis ossificans: a benign lesion that simulates malignant bone and soft tissue tumours. EFORT Open Rev 2021;6(7):572-83. PMID 34377549
29. Benatar C, Schwitzguebel A. [Identify, prevent, and treat myositis ossificans in athletes]. Rev Med Suisse 2025;21(926):1423-7. PMID 40671393 Article in French.
30. Cherry I, Mutschler M, Samara E, Merckaert S, Zambelli PY, Tschopp B. Myositis ossificans in the pediatric population: a systematic scoping review. Front Pediatr 2023;11:1295212. PMID 38161430
31. Kalebić P, Šegulja S, Miletić B, Vlahović H, Starčević-Klasan G. Early surgical treatment of posttraumatic myositis ossificans of the vastus intermedius muscle. J Sport Rehabil 2025;34(6):667-71. PMID 39826536
32. Torrance DA, Degraauw C. Treatment of post-traumatic myositis ossificans of the anterior thigh with extracorporeal shock wave therapy. J Can Chiropr Assoc 2011;55(4):240-6. PMID 22131560
33. Marques JP, Pinheiro JP, Santos Costa J, Moura D. Myositis ossificans of the quadriceps femoris in a soccer player. BMJ Case Rep 2015;2015:bcr2015210545. PMID 26264943 Initial injury: strain, not contusion.
34. Gullì C, Ferrara G, Ferravante E, et al. Revisiting myositis ossificans: a comprehensive stage-by-stage imaging review. Muscles 2026;5(2):27. PMID 42029569
35. Ogawa A, Kawabata M, Uchida Y, Kumazawa Y. Ultrasound-guided manual therapy for limitation of knee flexion due to quadriceps contusion with heterotopic ossification: a case report. Cureus 2025;17(9):e92299. PMID 41103901
36. O'Toole R, Hale M, Scarcella MJ. Acute compartment syndrome in a football player with quadriceps contusion and successful return to sport: a case report. JBJS Case Connect 2024;14(2):e23.00688. PMID 38758921
37. Correia G, Mendes Santos P, Campos JP, Camelo Barbosa N, Carvalho L. Acute compartment syndrome of the thigh after contusion in a football player. Cureus 2024;16(2):e53617. PMID 38449983
38. Lai B, Jiang H, Gao Y, Zhou X. Research trends and hotspots of myositis ossificans: a bibliometric analysis from 1993 to 2022. EFORT Open Rev 2024;9(7):589-99. PMID 38949159