Aim To re-examine the prevalence and presentation of early repolarization in athletes and to compare it with electrocardiographic abnormalities obser

Objective During the COVID-19 pandemic, it is essential to understand if and how to screen SARS-CoV-2-positive athletes to safely resume training and competitions. The aim of this study is to understand which investigations are useful in a screening protocol aimed at protecting health but also avoiding inappropriate examinations. Methods We conducted a cohort study of a professional soccer team that is based on an extensive screening protocol for resuming training during the COVID-19 pandemic. It included personal history, antigen swabs, blood tests, spirometry, resting/stress-test ECG with oxygen saturation monitoring, echocardiogram, Holter and chest CT. We also compared the findings with prior data from the same subjects before infection and with data from SARS-CoV-2-negative players. Results None of the players had positive swab and/or anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgM class antibodies. Out of 30 players, 18 (60%) had IgG class antibodies. None had suffered severe SARS-CoV-2-related disease, 12 (66.7%) had complained of mild COVID-19-related symptoms and 6 (33.3%) were asymptomatic. None of the players we examined revealed significant cardiovascular abnormalities after clinical recovery. A mild reduction in spirometry parameters versus pre-COVID-19 values was observed in all athletes, but it was statistically significant (p<0.05) only in SARS-CoV-2-positive athletes. One SARS-CoV-2-positive player showed increased troponin I level, but extensive investigation did not show signs of myocardial damage. Conclusion In this small cohort of athletes with previous asymptomatic/mild SARS-CoV-2 infection, a comprehensive screening protocol including blood tests, spirometry, resting ECG, stress-test ECG with oxygen saturation monitoring and echocardiogram did not identify relevant anomalies. While larger studies are needed, extensive cardiorespiratory and haematological screening in athletes with asymptomatic/mild SARS-CoV-2 infection appears unnecessary.

Background/aim Several changes have occurred in Olympic boxing (OB) in the last few decades, influencing the results in official competitions. The aim of this study was to assess how the evolution of rules changed the rate of the results that can influence boxers’ health. Methods From a web-research, the results of OB tournaments from 1952 to 2011 were reviewed (29 357 bouts). For each event, rate of knockout (KO), referee-stop contest (RSC), RSC-Head (RSCH), RSC-Injury (RSCI), RSC-Outclassed (RSCO), abandon, disqualification and points decisions were recorded. In our analysis we investigated the changes that occurred after the introduction of the standing-count rule (1964), mandatory head guard (1984), computerised scoring system (1992), RSCO (2000–2009) and modification of bout formula 3×3 min rounds (3×3, until 1997, 5×2 min rounds (5×2) until 1999, 4×2 min rounds (4×2) until 2008, 3×3 from 2009). Results The most important results were: (1) an RSCI rate increase (0.72–2.42%, p<0.03) after the standing-count rule; (2) a lower RSCI (0.60%, p<0.001) and higher RSCH (1.31–4.92%, p<0.001) and RSC (9.71–13.05%, p<0.03) rate with mandatory head guard; (3) a KO rate reduction (6.44–2.09%, p<0.001) with the computerised scoring system; (4) an RSC (13.15–5.91%, p<0.05) and RSCH (4.23–1.41%, p<0.001) rate reduction comparing 5×2–4×2 bouts. Conclusions In the last six decades, along with rule changes in OB, a clear reduction of health challenging results was observed. In the near future, older rules will be adopted (no head guard and a manual scoring system). Continued medical surveillance is important to ensure that new rule changes do not result in poor medical outcomes for the boxers.

Objectives:To investigate the prevalence of ocular injuries in a large population of boxers over a period of 16 years, in particular, the most severe lesions that may be vision threatening.Methods:Clinical records of the medical archive of the Italian Boxing Federation were analysed. A total of 1032 boxers were examined from February 1982 to October 1998. A complete ophthalmological history was available for 956, who formed the study population (a total of 10 697 examinations). The following data were collected: age when started boxing; duration of competitive boxing career (from the date of the first bout); weight category; a thorough ocular history. The following investigations were carried out: measurement of visual acuity and visual fields, anterior segment inspection, applanation tonometry, gonioscopy, and examination of ocular fundus. Eighty age matched healthy subjects, who had never boxed, formed the control group.Results:Of the 956 boxers examined, 428 were amateur (44.8%) and 528 professional (55.2%). The median age at first examination was 23.1 (4.3) years (range 15–36). The prevalence of conjunctival, corneal, lenticular, vitreal, ocular papilla, and retinal alterations in the study population was 40.9% compared with 3.1% in the control group (p⩽0.0001). The prevalence of serious ocular findings (angle, lens, macula, and peripheral retina alterations) was 5.6% in boxers and 3.1% in controls (NS).Conclusions:Boxing does not result in a higher prevalence of severe ocular lesions than in the general population. However, the prevalence of milder lesions (in particular with regard to the conjunctiva and cornea) is noteworthy, justifying the need for adequate ophthalmological surveillance.