Author(s): Kersten Schwanz, MD, Marcus Babcock, MD
Originally published: January 30, 2014 Last updated: May 7, 2026
Jump to:

Disease/Disorder

Definition

Lower limb exertional compartment syndrome (LLECS), also known as chronic exertional compartment syndrome (CECS), is an overuse syndrome characterized by exercise-induced elevation of intramuscular pressures (IMP) that results in reproducible transient pain, paresthesias, and neuromuscular dysfunction. Symptoms are absent at rest, occur at a well-defined distance, duration/intensity of exercise, and subside by discontinuation of provoking activity.

Etiology

The exact mechanism that causes exertional compartment syndrome is unknown. The increased intra-compartmental pressures are thought to impede tissue perfusion, create a relative oxygen debt, and result in symptom onset.

There are several proposed contributing factors, which vary from noncompliant anatomical tissues to deviations of anatomical features and build-up of metabolic byproducts.1 It has been suggested that venous outflow occlusion may play a significant role in increased compartment pressures and symptom development.2 Functional muscular compression and associated occlusion of vasculature has been proposed to create elevated hydrostatic pressures and fluid accumulation within the compartments, thereby explaining the elevated IMPs and common findings on imaging modalities.

Epidemiology including risk factors and primary prevention

CECS predominantly affects the lower leg, but may also present in the upper extremity and rarely in the upper leg or foot.3 Bilateral lower extremity involvement occurs in 85-95% of cases with a predilection for the anterior and deep compartments.4,5 The presence of unilateral symptoms is associated with prior trauma and vasculopathy.4 Risk factors include jumping, cutting, and skating sports. Location of LLECS can be sport or activity dependent. The deep posterior compartment is more often affected in soccer players, while the anterior compartment is associated with speed skating and non-sports activities.4

Involvement of the various compartments may follow different patterns. While LLECS can present in isolation, a portion of patients may have multiple compartments contributing to their symptoms. In those with anterolateral leg pain, the anterior and lateral compartments have simultaneous involvement in 58% of individuals, while the anterior and lateral compartments are isolated in 26% and 7%, respectfully.6 These presentations more commonly affect bilateral lower extremities, while deep posterior compartment involvement may be more common in a unilateral presentation.4

The incidence of LLECS in the general population is unknown, although some estimate that it accounts for 14-27% of previously undiagnosed exercise-induced leg pain.7 This may be under-appreciated secondary to poor awareness among medical providers and the public, as illustrated by an average of 22 months from symptom onset to treatment.7,8A vast majority (87%) of patients with LLECS participate in sports, with running accounting for 69%.7

LLECS has a median age of onset of 20 years old, and the prevalence decreases with age, though it has been suggested that there is an underdiagnosed population within older adults, plateauing around age 50.4 The most commonly associated activities were running and soccer.

While there are conflicting reports, there is no clear sex bias. A large study has found equal prevalence of CECS in males and females, however, males were more likely to receive a diagnosis of CECS; they also noted that findings of a higher prevalence of CECS in males in other studies may have limitations for interpretation due to selection bias of those enrolled.4 The United States military is considered a high-risk cohort with an adjusted annual incidence of up to 0.33-0.5 cases per 1000 person-years.5,9Amongst this group, women and Caucasian ancestry were found to be independent risk factors. In the pediatric population, one study has suggested that females are at highest risk of LLECS with a peak age incidence of 16 years-old.10

Patho-anatomy/physiology

The lower leg is divided into 4 main compartments: anterior, lateral, superficial posterior and deep posterior. Each consists of specific muscles and nerves contained within non-compliant fascial and osseous boundaries. The anterior and deep posterior compartments contain the anterior tibial and posterior tibial artery and vein, respectively. The fascia surrounding the posterior tibialis muscle is theorized to form a 5th compartment.

Elevation of IMP is believed to occur in response to physiologic and pathologic changes, including muscle hypertrophy, intracompartmental fluid, and fascial thickening, whose effect is enhanced by a 20% muscle volume increase during strenuous physical activity.2,11 Gait biomechanics additionally play a role in the development of CECS, as a hindfoot strike pattern has been demonstrated to lead to increased ground reaction force and eccentric tibialis anterior activation.12,13 This has been theorized to lead to increased IMP, particularly within the anterior compartment of the lower leg, when compared to running with a forefoot strike pattern.12

Table 1 lists the components of the lower limb compartments. Please note that fibularis musculature and fibular neurovascular structures are also known as peroneus or peroneal.

Table 1 – Components of the Lower Limb Compartments 3,4,11,21,22,23

Lower Limb Exertional Compartment Syndrome – Table 1

Disease progression including natural history, disease phases or stages, disease trajectory (clinical features and presentation over time)

  • Acute
    Acute compartment syndrome (ACS) is a separate and distinct etiology from LLECS. Although there is an extremely low risk of LLECS converting to ACS, quick recognition of its clinical features including pain, paresthesias, pulselessness, pallor, paralysis and poikilothermia is imperative as it is a surgical emergency that requires prompt evaluation by an orthopedic surgeon.
  • Subacute
    Symptoms begin as a sensation of tightness within a muscle compartment and advance to an aching, pressure-like discomfort.
  • Chronic/stable
    Symptoms are reproduced at a clearly defined volume of exercise. Pain may progress to a sharp, burning quality, especially if one continues to engage in the provoking activity. Transient weakness and paresthesias may develop with correlation to the affected compartment(s).
  • Pre-terminal
    A lower threshold of activity is required for symptom provocation. They become more intense and last for a longer duration after cessation of causative action. Also, neuromuscular dysfunction may become more pronounced. Despite worsening of symptoms, no evidence of permanent cellular damage has been found in histologic studies.14,15

It is important to note that it is common for symptoms to develop in multiple compartments over time. This may represent a natural progression of the condition or reemergence of symptoms in a new compartment after treatment, such as a fasciotomy.4

Specific secondary or associated conditions and complications

Supplementation with creatine monophosphate or anabolic steroid use may predispose athletes to LLCECS, secondary to fluid retention and rapid muscle hypertrophy. Aberrant gait mechanics, including rear foot landing and over pronation, may also contribute to exaggerated weight loading and strain on isolated muscle groups.12 There has been some speculation if LLECS is associated with other forms of vascular pathology, including popliteal artery entrapment syndrome (PAES) which also causes exertional leg pain, particularly regarding the posterior compartment.2,16 LLECS can additionally occur in sedentary individuals, especially those with diabetes mellitus.17 Ultimately, each of these distinct entities may warrant consideration in some clinical cases and each have their own workup.

Essentials of Assessment

History

A thorough history and physical exam is paramount as LLECS is a clinically diagnosed pathology. The differential for exertional leg pain is broad and contains entities both rare and common. See Table 2 for more information. Targeted history should help distinguish if patients are asymptomatic at rest and develop tightness and aching pain within the affected muscular region at a specific, reproducible duration or intensity of exercise. In CECS, symptoms intensify with activity and cause discontinuation of provoking exercise stimulus. Upon rest, symptoms resolve, though they may last for several minutes after cessation, differing from PAD, where symptoms will likely resolve immediately.17

Physical examination

Findings are normal when performed at rest; therefore, patients need to undergo an exercise challenge to elicit symptoms. Once pain is produced, affected compartment(s) may have a bulging or full appearance and be firm and tender to palpation.18 Muscle herniations via fascial defects are found in 40% of cases.15 Distal pulses are intact with warm extremities. Depending on the involved compartment(s), patients may demonstrate relative weakness and sensory impairment within a peripheral nerve distribution.

Table 2: Differential Diagnoses of Exercise-Associated Leg Pain16,17

Lower Limb Exertional Compartment Syndrome – Table 2

Functional assessment

Gait analysis should be performed as this can provide insight on biomechanical issues that may predispose patients to CECS of certain compartments. Table 1 summarizes the effect of LLECS on each compartment.

Imaging

CECS is a clinical diagnosis with imaging remaining supplementary to the patient’s history and physical examination. T2-weighted MRI images can detect increased intra-compartment signal intensity indicating edema, which correlates well with elevated IMP and has been found to have a high sensitivity (96%) and specificity (88%).19,20 In clinical practice, MRI is utilized to rule out structural abnormalities which may cause exertional leg pain that is not the result of CECS. MRI studies with arthrogram, arterial or venous duplex ultrasound, and lower limb CT angiograms may additionally rule out vascular etiology of exertional symptoms.

Several experimental imaging modalities show promise in assisting with diagnosis of LLCECS when imaging is completed both at rest and during exercise, often either immediately post-exercise or during isometric contraction. Near infrared spectroscopy (NIRS), single photon emission computed tomography (SPECT), and ultrasound shear wave elastography may also have a role in CECS diagnosis.19,21 All imaging studies need to be performed pre- and post-elicitation of symptoms. However, these non-invasive diagnostic techniques and their clinical utility require further investigation as there is a paucity of information regarding physiologic ranges, specifically fascial and compartment thickness, which eliminates the predictive value of ultrasound. Currently, more publications are using imaging modalities in place of ICP monitoring due to some of the questionable diagnostic criteria cutoffs and increasing thoughts that vascular pathology may be playing a role in the etiology of CECS.2,16

Supplemental assessment tools

The gold standard for diagnosis is intra-compartmental manometry, which must be performed at rest, then 1 and 5 minutes post symptom-provoking exercise. This can be performed with fluid-filled catheters (needle, wick, or slit), transducer-tipped catheters, or solid-state transducer intra-compartment catheters (STIC). All instruments are reported to have comparable accuracy if used properly. Potential confounding variables include catheter depth, insertion distance and angle, underlying structures, muscle contraction and position of the lower extremity. Though highly debated, the most widely accepted diagnostic values are 15 mm Hg at rest, 30 mm Hg at 1-minute post-exercise, and 20 mm Hg at 5-minutes post-exercise.22

Recently, there has been further debate on if this diagnostic criterion requires adjustment based on which compartment is being tested and the biologic sex of the patient as baseline intracompartmental pressures vary across male and female cohorts.23 Females with CECS have been shown to have significantly lower ICP in the anterior/lateral compartments, however a recent systematic review has not demonstrated this finding across all included studies.23 The patient’s height has also been noted to significantly increase the ICP of the lateral and anterior compartments, respectfully.24 These findings are relevant for clinical interventions and diagnostic interpretations, as those with results just below the Pedowitz diagnostic threshold may require further follow-up to optimize care.24

Environmental

Use of running shoes with a minimal heel and sole can reduce IMP by greater than 20 mm Hg secondary to biofeedback, which naturally encourages a forefoot running technique resulting in a decreased plantarflexion angle at heel strike and reduced eccentric contraction of anterior tibialis muscle due to reduced duration of plantarflexion.14

Rehabilitation Management and Treatments

Available or current treatment guidelines

The mainstay of treatment is medical and rehabilitation management with activity modification, avoidance of provocation, and gait retraining. Unfortunately, symptoms tend to recur with reintroduction of the aggravating activity; however, studies examining the effect of forefoot running (FFR) biomechanics on LLECS renew hope of non-surgical treatment for running-induced LLECS in the 89% of shod runners with a rearfoot strike pattern.25 In one study, patients who completed 6 weeks of FFR training returned to play, reduced their pain, and improved their performance.12 In addition to implementing a FFR pattern to reduce loading of anterior and lateral compartments, formal gait retraining recommendations also include increasing cadence >180 steps/min to reduce stride length and adopting a more upright running posture to minimize ground reaction forces.13 In cases that fail conservative efforts, elective surgical intervention should be considered.

At different disease stages

  • Acute
    If LLECS converts to an ACS, patients require emergent fasciotomy by an orthopedic surgeon.
  • Subacute
    Encourage conservative management. If the inflaming activity is running, undergo gait analysis and subsequent training to develop forefoot running pattern and other retraining strategies.13 Barefoot running or minimalistic shoes may help achieve this goal; however, they should not act as a substitute for professional guidance as one study demonstrated a low-conversion rate to FFR following an 8-week graduated running program without formal gait coaching.26,27
  • Chronic/stable
    Continue conservative measurements. Elective fasciotomy may provide an alternative course for patients such as professional athletes who wish or need to continue engaging in their sporting activity.
  • Pre-terminal
    If patients fail 6-12 weeks of conservative treatment/gait retraining, symptoms are produced at lower exertional thresholds, or symptom intensity has increased, fasciotomy of the affected compartment(s) should be considered.12 There are multiple methods to perform this procedure, including open, subcutaneous, endoscopic-assisted subcutaneous, and ultrasound-guided percutaneous.11,28 Not all techniques require inclusion of any hernias within the fascial incision. Patients who do not obtain relief with surgery may need to repeat the procedure with a more extensive release. Fasciectomy may be clinically indicated following a completed fasciotomy and subsequent recurrence of CECS symptoms.20,29 Literature regarding the efficacy of fasciectomy after failed fasciotomy is scarce. However, one study reported that 75% of participants with an unsuccessful fasciotomy were able to return to physical activity after undergoing a fasciectomy procedure.30

Coordination of care

Treatment of LLECS requires an interdisciplinary approach that should be led by a physiatrist or sports medicine physician and include physical therapy and orthopedic surgery as needed.

Patient & family education

  • Following symptom resolution with conservative management, patients should gradually resume the inciting exercise at a 10% increase in intensity or duration per week.
  • There is high variability of fasciotomy success rate depending on affected compartments and underlying anatomy. Isolated anterior and lateral compartment fasciotomies have been shown to be more successful than combined fasciotomy procedures or release of the posterior compartments.31–33 The lower success rate of posterior compartment fasciectomy may be attributed to misdiagnosis of CECS, as symptoms overlap with PAES and may occur concurrently.34
  • Recurrence rates of LLECS range from 6-11% and are often secondary to incomplete release, suboptimal rehabilitation, and non-adherence to post-operative instructions.35
  • Although a majority of patients’ symptoms improve after surgery, 58% of individuals may not be able to return to their pre-condition activity levels.36 Due to persistent symptoms, 17% of US military service personnel who underwent surgery for LLECS are medically discharged.37
  • Post-operative instructions and progression of activity can be surgeon and case specific. Generally, these include a period of compression followed by gradual reintroduction of range of motion and activity with full recovery around the 8-12 week mark.

Emerging/unique interventions

Preliminary studies of the use of intramuscular botulinum toxin A injections show potential for reduction of IMP and pain without causing functional impairment. Available literature has noted between 6-11 months of CECS symptomatic relief following treatment with botulinum toxin injections, but evidence is limited to case reports at this time.38 Further investigations are needed in order to compare efficacy to other treatment methods, establish proper dosing regimens, and to elucidate the therapeutic mechanism and protocol for which muscles to target.

Ultrasound-guided percutaneous fasciotomy is an emerging non-surgical technique that can be considered in cases of LLECS. The procedure involves sectioning subcutaneous fascia with a hooked blade or V-shaped meniscotome while using ultrasound guidance to avoid neurovascular structures.39 While safety has been demonstrated in cadaveric studies, available evidence supporting use is limited to case reports. Additional studies are needed to compare outcomes with existing methods of fasciotomy.29,39

Translation into practice: practice “pearls”/performance improvement in practice (PIPs)/changes in clinical practice behaviors and skills

LLECS is a relatively common cause of exertional leg pain that not only causes functional impairment but can impact patients’ quality of life. It predominantly affects younger runners. The most commonly involved compartment is the anterior, closely followed by the deep posterior. Although intra-compartmental manometry is the gold standard for objective testing, the diagnosis of LLECS remains clinical. Conservative treatment with gait retraining and activity modification are the mainstay of treatment; however, surgical intervention is a viable option for those unwilling or unable to discontinue the inciting activity.

Cutting Edge/Emerging and Unique Concepts and Practice

Simultaneous use of surface electromyography with intra-compartmental manometry looks to be a promising adjunct to the diagnosis of LLECS, as it can eliminate false positives caused by muscle contractions, which can create confounding elevation of IMP.40 Despite a case report of isolated absence of F-waves in a patient with LLECS, electrodiagnostic studies have no clinical value for diagnostic purposes, as transiently elevated IMP are not sustained long enough to produce electrical abnormalities.41,42 Histopathology studies of biopsied specimens from LLECS patients compared to controls have revealed lower capillary density and relatively thicker fascia but no consistent inflammatory markers.1 Diagnostic ultrasound measuring compartment thickness is a non-invasive diagnostic test that requires further investigation and development of normative data.43

Gaps in the Evidence-Based Knowledge

Prior studies designed to establish diagnostic IMP criteria for LLECS are fraught with methodological flaws. Additional studies are needed to identify normal values for IMP, fascial thickness, and an optimal exercise protocol to aid the validation of a standardized diagnostic criterion. Further investigations are needed to highlight differences that may exist between the different compartments and between different patient populations: civilian vs military, male vs female, etc.4,24,44 Image-guided catheter placement may provide a higher diagnostic value as 58% of palpation-guided catheters meant for the deep posterior compartment have suboptimal to inaccurate placement.45 Recent studies have been suggesting some overlap between CECS and vascular pathology.2,16 It will be imperative to continue investigations into this relationship if these entities exist on a spectrum or if they appear commonly present concomitantly.

References

  1. Barbour TDA, Briggs CA, Bell SN, Bradshaw CJ, Venter DJ, Brukner PD. Histology of the fascial-periosteal interface in lower limb chronic deep posterior compartment syndrome. Br J Sports Med. 2004;38(6):709-717. doi:10.1136/bjsm.2003.007039
  2. McGinley JC, Thompson TA, Ficken S, White J. Chronic Exertional Compartment Syndrome Caused by Functional Venous Outflow Obstruction. Clin J Sport Med. 2022;32(4):355-360. doi:10.1097/JSM.0000000000000929
  3. Ray RG. Chronic Exertional Compartment Syndrome of the Foot. Clinics in Podiatric Medicine and Surgery. 2021;38(2):143-164. doi:10.1016/j.cpm.2020.12.002
  4. de Bruijn JA, van Zantvoort APM, van Klaveren D, et al. Factors Predicting Lower Leg Chronic Exertional Compartment Syndrome in a Large Population. Int J Sports Med. 2018;39(1):58-66. doi:10.1055/s-0043-119225
  5. Brewer RB, Gregory AJM. Chronic lower leg pain in athletes: a guide for the differential diagnosis, evaluation, and treatment. Sports Health. 2012;4(2):121-127. doi:10.1177/1941738111426115
  6. van Zantvoort APM, Hundscheid HPH, de Bruijn JA, Hoogeveen AR, Teijink JAW, Scheltinga MRM. Isolated Lateral Chronic Exertional Compartment Syndrome of the Leg: A New Entity? Orthop J Sports Med. 2019;7(12):2325967119890105. doi:10.1177/2325967119890105
  7. Rajasekaran S, Kvinlaug K, Finnoff JT. Exertional leg pain in the athlete. PM R. 2012;4(12):985-1000. doi:10.1016/j.pmrj.2012.10.002
  8. Detmer DE, Sharpe K, Sufit RL, Girdley FM. Chronic compartment syndrome: diagnosis, management, and outcomes. Am J Sports Med. 1985;13(3):162-170. doi:10.1177/036354658501300304
  9. Waterman BR, Liu J, Newcomb R, Schoenfeld AJ, Orr JD, Belmont PJ. Risk factors for chronic exertional compartment syndrome in a physically active military population. Am J Sports Med. 2013;41(11):2545-2549. doi:10.1177/0363546513497922
  10. Beck JJ, Tepolt FA, Miller PE, Micheli LJ, Kocher MS. Surgical Treatment of Chronic Exertional Compartment Syndrome in Pediatric Patients. Am J Sports Med. 2016;44(10):2644-2650. doi:10.1177/0363546516651830
  11. Murray MC, Heckman MM. Chronic Exertional Compartment Syndrome: Diagnostic Techniques and Management. Techniques in Orthopaedics. 2012;27(1):75. doi:10.1097/BTO.0b013e3182488423
  12. Diebal AR, Gregory R, Alitz C, Gerber JP. Forefoot running improves pain and disability associated with chronic exertional compartment syndrome. Am J Sports Med. 2012;40(5):1060-1067. doi:10.1177/0363546512439182
  13. Zimmermann WO, Bakker EWP. Reducing vertical ground reaction forces: The relative importance of three gait retraining cues. Clin Biomech (Bristol). 2019;69:16-20. doi:10.1016/j.clinbiomech.2019.06.014
  14. Roberts A, Franklyn-Miller A. The validity of the diagnostic criteria used in chronic exertional compartment syndrome: a systematic review. Scand J Med Sci Sports. 2012;22(5):585-595. doi:10.1111/j.1600-0838.2011.01386.x
  15. Bresler M, Mar W, Toman J. Diagnostic imaging in the evaluation of leg pain in athletes. Clin Sports Med. 2012;31(2):217-245. doi:10.1016/j.csm.2011.09.006
  16. Johnson SE, Finnoff JT, Amrami KK, Jelsing EJ. Radiological Prevalence of Popliteal Artery Entrapment in Individuals With Anterior Leg Compartment Chronic Exertional Compartment Syndrome. Clin J Sport Med. 2022;32(2):e160-e164. doi:10.1097/JSM.0000000000000885
  17. de Bruijn JA, Wijns KCA, van Kuijk SMJ, Hoogeveen AR, Teijink JAW, Scheltinga MRM. Chronic exertional compartment syndrome in the differential diagnosis of peripheral artery disease in older patients with exercise-induced lower limb pain. J Vasc Surg. 2021;73(6):2114-2121. doi:10.1016/j.jvs.2020.11.027
  18. de Bruijn J, Winkes M, van Eerten P, Scheltinga M. Chronic exertional compartment syndrome as a cause of anterolateral leg pain. Unfallchirurg. 2020;123(Suppl 1):8-14. doi:10.1007/s00113-019-0641-9
  19. Ritchie ED, Vogels S, van Dongen TTCF, et al. Systematic Review of Innovative Diagnostic Tests for Chronic Exertional Compartment Syndrome. Int J Sports Med. 2023;44(1):20-28. doi:10.1055/a-1866-5957
  20. Verleisdonk EJ, van Gils A, van der Werken C. The diagnostic value of MRI scans for the diagnosis of chronic exertional compartment syndrome of the lower leg. Skeletal Radiol. 2001;30(6):321-325. doi:10.1007/s002560100361
  21. Berrigan WA, Wickstrom J, Farrell M, Alter K. Botulinum Toxin A for Chronic Exertional Compartment Syndrome Evaluated With Shear Wave Elastography: A Case Report. Clin J Sport Med. 2022;32(2):e178-e180. doi:10.1097/JSM.0000000000000910
  22. Pedowitz RA, Hargens AR, Mubarak SJ, Gershuni DH. Modified criteria for the objective diagnosis of chronic compartment syndrome of the leg. Am J Sports Med. 1990;18(1):35-40. doi:10.1177/036354659001800106
  23. Rothman R, Berke C, Jivanelli B, Casey E, Cheng J. Sex and gender differences in lower limb chronic exertional compartment syndrome: a systematic review. The Physician and Sportsmedicine. 2024;52(1):1-11. doi:10.1080/00913847.2023.2173489
  24. Lindorsson S, Zhang Q, Brisby H, Rennerfelt K. Significantly lower intramuscular pressure in the posterior and lateral compartments compared with the anterior compartment suggests alterations of the diagnostic criteria for chronic exertional compartment syndrome in the lower leg. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2021;29(4):1332-1339. doi:10.1007/s00167-020-06143-w
  25. Altman AR, Davis IS. Prospective comparison of running injuries between shod and barefoot runners. Br J Sports Med. 2016;50(8):476-480. doi:10.1136/bjsports-2014-094482
  26. Barcellona MG, Buckley L, Palmer LJM, et al. The effect of minimalist footwear and instruction on running: an observational study. BMJ Open Sport Exerc Med. 2017;3(1):e000160. doi:10.1136/bmjsem-2016-000160
  27. Tam N, Tucker R, Astephen Wilson JL. Individual Responses to a Barefoot Running Program: Insight Into Risk of Injury. Am J Sports Med. 2016;44(3):777-784. doi:10.1177/0363546515620584
  28. Lueders DR, Sellon JL, Smith J, Finnoff JT. Ultrasound-Guided Fasciotomy for Chronic Exertional Compartment Syndrome: A Cadaveric Investigation. PM R. 2017;9(7):683-690. doi:10.1016/j.pmrj.2016.09.002
  29. Rajasekaran S, Hall MM. Nonoperative Management of Chronic Exertional Compartment Syndrome: A Systematic Review. Curr Sports Med Rep. 2016;15(3):191-198. doi:10.1249/JSR.0000000000000261
  30. Vogels S, Van Ark W, Janssen L, Scheltinga MRM. Fasciectomy for Recurrent Chronic Exertional Compartment Syndrome of the Anterior Leg. Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise. 2021;53(8):1549-1554. doi:10.1249/MSS.0000000000002631
  31. Van Zantvoort APM, De Bruijn JA, Hundscheid HPH, Teijink JAW, Scheltinga MR. Lower Leg Lateral Chronic Exertional Compartment Syndrome: Prospective Surgical Treatment Outcomes for Isolated or Combined Lateral Fasciotomy. Foot Ankle Int. 2023;44(11):1097-1104. doi:10.1177/10711007231192076
  32. Packer JD, Day MS, Nguyen JT, Hobart SJ, Hannafin JA, Metzl JD. Functional Outcomes and Patient Satisfaction After Fasciotomy for Chronic Exertional Compartment Syndrome. Am J Sports Med. 2013;41(2):430-436. doi:10.1177/0363546512471330
  33. Winkes MB, Van Zantvoort APM, De Bruijn JA, et al. Fasciotomy for Deep Posterior Compartment Syndrome in the Lower Leg: A Prospective Study. Am J Sports Med. 2016;44(5):1309-1316. doi:10.1177/0363546515626540
  34. Turnipseed WD. Functional popliteal artery entrapment syndrome: A poorly understood and often missed diagnosis that is frequently mistreated. Journal of Vascular Surgery. 2009;49(5):1189-1195. doi:10.1016/j.jvs.2008.12.005
  35. Tucker AK. Chronic exertional compartment syndrome of the leg. Curr Rev Musculoskelet Med. 2010;3(1-4):32-37. doi:10.1007/s12178-010-9065-4
  36. Slimmon D, Bennell K, Brukner P, Crossley K, Bell SN. Long-term outcome of fasciotomy with partial fasciectomy for chronic exertional compartment syndrome of the lower leg. Am J Sports Med. 2002;30(4):581-588. doi:10.1177/03635465020300041901
  37. Wuellner JC, Nathe CD, Kreulen CD, Burnham KJ, Giza E. Chronic Exertional Compartment Syndrome: The Athleteʼs Claudication. Operative Techniques in Sports Medicine. 2017;25(2):52-58. doi:10.1053/j.otsm.2017.03.004
  38. Buerba RA, Fretes NF, Devana SK, Beck JJ. Chronic exertional compartment syndrome: current management strategies. Open Access J Sports Med. 2019;10:71-79. doi:10.2147/OAJSM.S168368
  39. Machado A, Fauchille T, Fairag R, et al. Ultrasound-Guided Percutaneous Fasciotomies for Patients With Chronic Exertional Compartment Syndrome. Arthrosc Tech. 2024;13(11):103119. doi:10.1016/j.eats.2024.103119
  40. Zhang Q, Jonasson C, Styf J. Simultaneous intramuscular pressure and surface electromyography measurement in diagnosing the chronic compartment syndrome. Scand J Med Sci Sports. 2011;21(2):190-195. doi:10.1111/j.1600-0838.2009.01010.x
  41. Burnham RS, Chan M, Reid DC. The Use of Electrodiagnostic Studies in the Diagnosis of Chronic Compartment Syndrome. Clinical Journal of Sport Medicine. 1994;4(4):219.
  42. American Journal of Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation. Accessed September 28, 2025. https://journals.lww.com/ajpmr/fulltext/2013/08000/f_wave_abnormalities_in_a_patient_with_possible.12.aspx
  43. Rajasekaran S, Beavis C, Aly AR, Leswick D. The utility of ultrasound in detecting anterior compartment thickness changes in chronic exertional compartment syndrome: a pilot study. Clin J Sport Med. 2013;23(4):305-311. doi:10.1097/JSM.0b013e3182856046
  44. Lindorsson S, Rennerfelt K, Brisby H, Zhang Q. The effect of gender on intramuscular pressure in patients with chronic exertional compartment syndrome of the lower leg. Scand J Med Sci Sports. 2022;32(1):202-210. doi:10.1111/sms.14064
  45. Winkes MB, Tseng CM, Pasmans HL, van der Cruijsen-Raaijmakers M, Hoogeveen AR, Scheltinga MR. Accuracy of Palpation-Guided Catheter Placement for Muscle Pressure Measurements in Suspected Deep Posterior Chronic Exertional Compartment Syndrome of the Lower Leg: A Magnetic Resonance Imaging Study. Am J Sports Med. 2016;44(10):2659-2666. doi:10.1177/0363546516652113

Bibliography

Aweid O, Buono A, Malliaras P, et al. Systematic review and recommendations for intracompartmental pressure monitoring in diagnosing chronic exertional compartment syndrome of the leg. Clin J Sport Med. 2012;22(4):356-370.

Birtles DB, Rayson MP, Jones DA, Padhiar N, Casey A, Newham DJ. Effect of eccentric exercise on patients with chronic exertional compartment syndrome. Eur J Appl Physiol. 2003;88(6):565-571.

Nwakibu U, Schwarzman G, Zimmerman WO, Hutchinson MR. Chronic exertional compartment syndrome of the leg management is changing: where are we and where are we going? Current Sports Med Reports. 2020; 19(10):438-444

Velasco TO, Leggit JC. Chronic exertional compartment syndrome: a clinical update. Current Sports Med Reports. 2020; 19(9):345-352

Original version of the topic

Brionn K. Tonkin, MD, Alexander M. Senk, MD. Lower limb exertional compartment syndrome. Original Publication Date: 1/30/2014

Previous Revision(s) of the topic

Brionn K. Tonkin, MD, Alexander M. Senk, MD, Deborah Hudleston, MD. Lower limb exertional compartment syndrome. Original Publication Date: 9/6/2018

Alexander M. Senk, MD, Kersten L Schwanz, MD, Katherine Weir, MS. Lower Limb Exertional Compartment Syndrome. 12/14/2022

Author Disclosure

Kersten Schwanz, MD
Nothing to Disclose

Marcus Babcock, MD
Nothing to Disclose