Xiang Jiang1, Shenglong Qian1, Cheng Chen1, Helin Wu2, Xiaosong Zhi1, Dan Xu3, Junhong Lian4, Ximing Liu1,2, Shijun Wei5,6, Feng Xu1,2. 1. Department of Orthopaedics, General Hospital of Central Theater Command (Wuhan General Hospital of Guangzhou Command, Previously), Wuhan, Hubei Province, People's Republic of China. 2. The First Clinical Medical School Of, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, Guangdong Province, People's Republic of China. 3. Department of Rehabilitation, General Hospital of Central Theater Command (Wuhan General Hospital of Guangzhou Command, Previously), Wuhan, Hubei Province, People's Republic of China. 4. Department of Orthopaedics, General Hospital of Central Theater Command (Wuhan General Hospital of Guangzhou Command, Previously), Wuhan, Hubei Province, People's Republic of China. 1329161413@qq.com. 5. Department of Orthopaedics, General Hospital of Central Theater Command (Wuhan General Hospital of Guangzhou Command, Previously), Wuhan, Hubei Province, People's Republic of China. wsj1974@yeah.net. 6. The First Clinical Medical School Of, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, Guangdong Province, People's Republic of China. wsj1974@yeah.net.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Several kinds of minimally invasive surgical techniques are applied to acute Achilles tendon rupture. The risks of sural never injury and re-ruptures are still major issues. The purpose of this study was to compare the middle-term results of two different minimally invasive repair techniques for acute Achille tendon rupture. METHODS: Twenty-four cases underwent the modified mini-incision "internal splinting" repair technique in group A, and 29 cases underwent a percutaneous repair technique in group B and were evaluated. The intra-operative data, complications, the time of recovery, and the post-operative magnetic resonance imaging were analyzed. At the final follow-up, the American Orthopedic Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS) ankle-hindfoot score and Thermann score were evaluated. RESULTS: The mean follow-up time was 59.96 ± 4.16 months (range 48-67). At the final follow-up, the AOFAS score and Thermann score in both groups had similar feedback. No nerve injury, infection, or re-rupture was encountered in group A, except two cases with anchor irritation. One case with sural nerve injury and one with a re-rupture were recorded in group B, respectively. The final MRI showed thicker regeneration of the tendon in both groups. CONCLUSIONS: The middle-term results indicated the modified mini-incision "internal splinting" technique for acute Achilles tendon rupture is similar to the percutaneous repair technique. A lower risk of sural nerve injury and re-rupture may be advantages.
PURPOSE: Several kinds of minimally invasive surgical techniques are applied to acute Achilles tendon rupture. The risks of sural never injury and re-ruptures are still major issues. The purpose of this study was to compare the middle-term results of two different minimally invasive repair techniques for acute Achille tendon rupture. METHODS: Twenty-four cases underwent the modified mini-incision "internal splinting" repair technique in group A, and 29 cases underwent a percutaneous repair technique in group B and were evaluated. The intra-operative data, complications, the time of recovery, and the post-operative magnetic resonance imaging were analyzed. At the final follow-up, the American Orthopedic Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS) ankle-hindfoot score and Thermann score were evaluated. RESULTS: The mean follow-up time was 59.96 ± 4.16 months (range 48-67). At the final follow-up, the AOFAS score and Thermann score in both groups had similar feedback. No nerve injury, infection, or re-rupture was encountered in group A, except two cases with anchor irritation. One case with sural nerve injury and one with a re-rupture were recorded in group B, respectively. The final MRI showed thicker regeneration of the tendon in both groups. CONCLUSIONS: The middle-term results indicated the modified mini-incision "internal splinting" technique for acute Achilles tendon rupture is similar to the percutaneous repair technique. A lower risk of sural nerve injury and re-rupture may be advantages.
Authors: Ilhan Alcelik; Zubair M Saeed; Ben A Haughton; Rizwan Shahid; John C Alcelik; Craig Brogden; Adam Budgen Journal: Foot Ankle Surg Date: 2017-05-04 Impact factor: 2.705
Authors: Juuso Heikkinen; Iikka Lantto; Tapio Flinkkila; Pasi Ohtonen; Jaakko Niinimaki; Pertti Siira; Vesa Laine; Juhana Leppilahti Journal: Am J Sports Med Date: 2017-03-10 Impact factor: 6.202
Authors: Andrew R Hsu; Carroll P Jones; Bruce E Cohen; W Hodges Davis; J Kent Ellington; Robert B Anderson Journal: Foot Ankle Int Date: 2015-06-08 Impact factor: 2.827
Authors: Jimmy J Chan; Kevin K Chen; Salman Sarker; Rohit Hasija; Hsin-Hui Huang; Javier Z Guzman; Ettore Vulcano Journal: Int Orthop Date: 2020-01-06 Impact factor: 3.075
Authors: Yassine Ochen; Reinier B Beks; Mark van Heijl; Falco Hietbrink; Luke P H Leenen; Detlef van der Velde; Marilyn Heng; Olivier van der Meijden; Rolf H H Groenwold; R Marijn Houwert Journal: BMJ Date: 2019-01-07