Dataset Information

Comparison of mini-open repair system and percutaneous repair for acute Achilles tendon rupture.

ABSTRACT:

Background

To reduce incision complications, minimally invasive operative approaches for treatment with acute Achilles tendon rupture have been developed, such as Mini-open repair and percutaneous repair. Which technique is the better surgical option? In the present study, we compared the two surgical procedures- modified Mini-open repair versus percutaneous repair-in the treatment of acute Achilles tendon rupture.

Methods

From January 2016 to November 2018, 68 matched patients with acute Achilles tendon rupture were divided into treatment group (Mini-open with modified Ma-Griffith technique) and control group (the Ma-Griffith technique). The patients were then treated with different surgical techniques and followed up for no less than 24 months, and the functional outcome scores and complications were retrospectively evaluated.

Results

The mean follow-up time in Mini-open repair group was 29.0±2.9 months, and that in control group was 27.9±2.9 months (P=0.147). The Mini-open repair group showed reliably higher American Orthopedic Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS) Ankle-Hindfoot Score and Achilles tendon Total Rupture Score (ATRS) than the control group in functional assessment (95.0±3.8 vs. 92.3±5.3, P=0.000; 93.8±3.8 vs. 90.9±4.5,P=0.000). There was no cases of sural nerve injury in Mini-open repair group, whereas the percutaneous repair group had 5 cases of the same (P=0.027). No significant differences were found in the calf circumference (32.3±3.9 vs. 31.8±3.6) (P=0.564), range of motion of the ankle (51.3±4.8 vs. 50.5±4.2, P=0.362), or wound complications (34/0 vs. 34/0) (P=1.000) between the two groups at the end of the follow-up time. However, the percutaneous repair group had a shorter average operating time (23.1±5.2 min) than that of the Mini-open repair group (27.7±4.3 min) (P=0.000).

Conclusions

Acute Achilles tendon ruptures may be treated successfully with a new Mini-open repair system or percutaneous repair technique. However, the Mini-open repair system may represent a superior surgical option, since it offers advantages in terms of direct visual control of the repair, AOFAS Ankle-Hindfoot Score, Achilles tendon Total Rupture Score and risk of sural nerve palsy.

Study design

Case-control studies, Level of evidence, 3.

SUBMITTER: Li Y

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8556965 | biostudies-literature | 2021 Oct

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Comparison of mini-open repair system and percutaneous repair for acute Achilles tendon rupture.

Li Yong Y Jiang Qiang Q Chen Hua H Xin Hongkui H He Qing Q Ruan Dike D

BMC musculoskeletal disorders 20211030 1

<h4>Background</h4>To reduce incision complications, minimally invasive operative approaches for treatment with acute Achilles tendon rupture have been developed, such as Mini-open repair and percutaneous repair. Which technique is the better surgical option? In the present study, we compared the two surgical procedures- modified Mini-open repair versus percutaneous repair-in the treatment of acute Achilles tendon rupture.<h4>Methods</h4>From January 2016 to November 2018, 68 matched patients wi ...[more]

PMID: 34717595

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundPercutaneous repair of acute Achilles tendon rupture (ATR) continues to gain in popularity. The primary aim of the study was to review the outcomes of a patient cohort undergoing a novel technique of endoscopic percutaneous Achilles tendon repair with absorbable suture. A secondary purpose of this study was to evaluate the basic biomechanical properties of the technique.MethodsA cohort of 30 patients who underwent percutaneous ATR repair was retrospectively analyzed with Achilles Tendon Rupture Scores (ATRS), complications, and additional outcome measures. For a biomechanical analysis portion of the study, 12 cadaveric specimens were paired and randomized to either novel percutaneous repair or open Kessler repair with absorbable suture. These specimens were subjected to 2 phases of cyclical testing (100 cycles 10-43 N followed by 200 cycles 10-86 N) and ultimate strength testing.ResultsIn the clinical portion of the study we report excellent patient reported outcomes (mean ATRS 94.1), high level of return to sport, and high patient satisfaction. One partial re-rupture was reported but with no major wound or neurologic complications. In the biomechanical portion of the study we found no significant difference in tendon gapping between percutaneous and open repairs in phase 1 of testing. In phase 2, increased gapping occurred between percutaneous (17.8 mm [range 10.7-24.1, SD 6.4]) and open repairs (10.8 mm [range 7.6-14.9, SD 2.7, P = .037]). The ultimate load at failure was not statistically different between the 2 repairs.ConclusionsA percutaneous ATR repair technique using endoscopic assistance and absorbable suture demonstrated low complications and good outcomes in a cohort of patients, with high satisfaction, and excellent functional outcomes including high rates of return to sport. Cadaveric biomechanical testing demonstrated excellent survival during testing and minimal increase in gapping compared with open repair technique, representing sufficient strength to withstand forces seen in early rehabilitation. A percutaneous Achilles tendon repair technique with absorbable suture may minimize risks associated with operative repair while still maintaining the benefit of operative repair.Level of evidenceLevel IV, retrospective case series.

Project description:Rupture of the Achilles tendon is a common injury seen in patients of varying ages and activity levels. There are many considerations for treatment of these injuries, with both operative and nonoperative management providing satisfactory outcomes in the literature. The decision to proceed with surgical intervention should be individualized for each patient, including the patient’s age, future athletic goals, and comorbidities. Recently, a minimally invasive percutaneous approach to repair the Achilles tendon has been proposed as an equivalent alternative to the traditional open repair, while avoiding wound complications associated with larger incisions. However, many surgeons have been hesitant to adopt these approaches due to poor visualization, concern that suture capture in the tendon is not as robust, and the potential for iatrogenic sural nerve injury. The purpose of this Technical Note is to describe a technique using high-resolution ultrasound guidance intraoperatively during minimally invasive repair of the Achilles tendon. This technique minimizes the drawbacks of poor visualization associated with percutaneous repair, while providing the benefit of a minimally invasive approach. Technique Video Video 1 Detailed description of our preferred technique using ultrasound guidance during Achilles tendon repair with the Percutaneous Achilles Repair System (PARS) system. The ultrasound probe is placed over the posterior aspect of the ankle, overlying the Achilles tendon. The patient is in the prone position on the operating table. In the long axis view, the longitudinal fibers of the Achilles tendon and paratenon can be visualized. Moving distally, the Achilles tendon can be visualized as it inserts onto the calcaneus. Moving from distal to proximal, the Achilles tendon can be seen fanning out from a cord-like structure to more of a ribbon-like structure as it extends into the gastrocnemius and soleus. In the short-axis view, the “broom-end” appearance of the tendon can be appreciated. Moving lateral to the tendon, the sural vein and nerve can be visualized and avoided during the PARS repair. The sural nerve can be identified by its location and the classic honeycomb appearance, in contrast to the accompanying sural vein, which is hypoechoic in nature and compressible. While using the ultrasound intraoperatively, the surgeon can ensure the PARS needles are passed through the jig into the bulk of the Achilles tendon. This can be visualized on both the short- and long-axis views after each suture pass and can help decrease risk of suture cutout due to poor suture placement. Use of the ultrasound intraoperatively also allows the surgeon to identify the location of the sural nerve, and avoid it during the procedure and with each needle pass. After each needle pass is confirmed on ultrasound to have proper position, the remainder of the repair proceeds as normal.

Dataset Information

Comparison of mini-open repair system and percutaneous repair for acute Achilles tendon rupture.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Study design

Publications

Comparison of mini-open repair system and percutaneous repair for acute Achilles tendon rupture.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets