Acute Achilles Rupture Percutaneous Repair: Approach, Materials, Techniques

Biomechanical comparison of shoelace suture technique for repairing calcaneal tendon

BACKGROUND

The biomechanical assessment of tendon repair is essential for the evaluation of different tendon suturing techniques. The shoelace suture technique with absorbable Vicryl® is a modified technique of Achilles tendon repair that may have biomechanical advantages depending on the number of threads used and the direction of the suture.

PURPOSE

To evaluate the creep under constant pre-load, the stiffness, the maximum strength, and the failure mode for three different configurations of the shoelace suture in a bovine tendon biomechanical model.

STUDY DESIGN

Controlled Laboratory Study.

METHODS

36 bovine Achilles tendon specimens were acquired and divided into three test groups of 12 Achilles tendons each. A model of the calcaneal tendon rupture was created through a transverse cut with a scalpel, performed 5 centimeters proximal to the calcaneal bone insertion. Group 1 was repaired using the simple shoelace technique with just one suture. Group 2 was repaired using the shoelace technique with three sutures individually sutured from distal to proximal at the site of rupture. Group 3 was repaired using the shoelace technique with three sutures individually sutured from proximal to distal at the site of rupture.

RESULTS

System creep after constant pre-load was 5.9 ± 2.5 mm, 3.0 ± 0.4 mm and 2.9 ± 0.4 mm for groups 1, 2 and 3, respectively. The system's stiffness was 23.2 ± 2.8 N/mm, 30.3 ± 1.1 N/mm and 29.8 ± 2.3 N/mm for groups 1, 2 and 3, respectively. In the final load-to-failure test, the ultimate load force (ULF) was 158.2 ± 27.5 N, 346.5 ± 47.6 N and 358.1 ± 41.6 N for groups 1, 2 and 3, respectively. There was statistical significance in the comparative tests between groups 1-2 and 1-3 in terms of means of creep, system stiffness and maximum system strength. No statistically significant difference was found between groups 2 and 3 when analyzing creep, system stiffness and ULF. Suture breakage was the prevalent mode of failure for all tested groups.

CONCLUSION

The shoelace with three sutures significantly reduced creep in the preloading phase and increased the stiffness and ultimate load force. The biomechanical results demonstrate better overall mechanical performance of the technique than the simple shoelace technique. The better mechanical performance indicates that the shoelace with three sutures could result in early postoperative rehabilitation.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

This study indicates that the shoelace suture technique with three sutures is biomechanically strong and stiff, being a possible therapeutic option to be used.

Operative vs Nonoperative Management of Achilles Tendon Rupture: A Cost Analysis

Background

Achilles tendon rupture (ATR) is a common injury with a growing incidence rate. Treatment is either operative or nonoperative. However, evidence is lacking on the cost comparison between these modalities. The objective of this study is to investigate the cost differences between operative and nonoperative treatment of ATR using a large national database.

Methods

Patients who received treatment for an ATR were abstracted from the large national commercial insurance claims database, Marketscan Commercial Claims and Encounters Database (n = 100 825) and divided into nonoperative (n = 75 731) and operative (n = 25 094) cohorts. Demographics, location, and health care charges were compared using multivariable regression analysis. Subanalysis of costs for medical services including clinic visits, imaging studies, opioid usage, and physical therapy were conducted. Patients who underwent secondary repair were excluded.

Results

Operative treatment was associated with increased net and total payments, coinsurance, copayment, deductible, coordination of benefits (COB) / savings, greater number of clinic visits, radiographs, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scans, and physical therapy (PT) sessions, and with higher net costs due to clinic visits, radiographs, MRIs, and PT (P < .001). Operative repair at an ambulatory surgical center was associated with a lower net and total payment, and a significantly higher deductible compared to in-hospital settings (P < .001). Both cohorts received similar numbers of opioid prescriptions during the study period. Yet, operative patients had a significantly shorter duration of opioid use. After controlling for confounders, operative repair was also independently associated with lower net costs due to opioid prescriptions.

Conclusion

Compared with nonoperatively managed ATR, surgical repair is associated with greater costs partially because of greater utilization of clinic visits, imaging, and physical therapy sessions. However, surgical costs may be reduced when procedures are performed in ambulatory surgery centers vs hospital facilities. Nonoperative treatment is associated with higher prescription costs secondary to longer duration of opioid use.

Level of Evidence

Level III, retrospective cohort study.

Outcomes of Percutaneous Achilles Repair Compared With Endoscopic Flexor Hallucis Longus Tendon Transfer to Treat Achilles Tendon Ruptures

BACKGROUND

Both percutaneous and endoscopically assisted methods are reported to produce good results in the surgical management of acute Achilles tendon ruptures. The aim of this retrospective study was to compare between a percutaneous method and a recently described isolated endoscopically assisted flexor hallucis longus (FHL) transfer method as surgical means of management in patients with acute Achilles tendon ruptures.

METHODS

One hundred seventeen patients were included in the current study and divided into 2 groups: 59 patients who underwent percutaneous Achilles repair (PAR Group) and 58 patients who underwent isolated endoscopic FHL transfer (FHL Group) were compared. Patients were clinically evaluated using American Orthopaedic Foot & Ankle Society (AOFAS) ankle-hindfoot score, Achilles tendon Total Rupture Score (ATRS), and Achilles tendon resting angle (ATRA) measures. In addition, ankle plantarflexion power, FHL dynamometry, Tegner activity levels, and return to previous levels of activity were also documented for all patients.

RESULTS

Nine months after surgery, patients in the FHL transfer group were more likely to be able to return to normal activities (91% vs 73%, P < .01). Thirty months after surgical treatment, we found no difference in ATRS, AOFAS, ATRA, ankle plantarflexion strength, or Tegner activity scores between study groups. Overall complications were reported in 6 patients in the FHL group (10.3%) and in 8 patients in the PAR group (13.6%). No major neurovascular or skin complications were encountered.

CONCLUSION

The current study demonstrated satisfactory and comparable results and complications when comparing isolated endoscopic FHL tendon transfer or percutaneous Achilles tendon repairs in the surgical management of acute Achilles tendon ruptures.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, retrospective controlled trial.

Minimally Invasive Repair of Subacute Achilles Tendon Ruptures: A Report of 2 Cases

Level IV: Case report.

Achillon versus modified minimally invasive repair treatment in acute Achilles tendon rupture

PURPOSE

To date, the best treatment of acute Achilles tendon rupture (AATR) is still inconclusive. Achillon seems to be a promising approach with satisfactory function and low complication rate. We hypothesize a modified minimally invasive repair (MMIR), which provides direct visualization of proximal tendon stump without specialized equipment that could provide comparable results. This trial is aimed to evaluate the functional and surgical outcomes of MMIR comparing with Achillon.

METHODS

From February 2013 to February 2017, 114 patients with AATR were enrolled in this trial, underwent an alternative operation (Achillon or MMIR), and accelerated rehabilitation protocol. Forty-four patients took the Achillon and the other 70 patients took the MMIR at their subjective choice. One hundred eleven full follow-up data were obtained including Achilles tendon total rupture score (ATRS), time back to work, rerupture rate, overall complication rate, and operation time.

RESULTS

There was no significant difference between groups in demographic characters. There was no statistical difference between both groups regarding to time return to work and ATRS at 3rd, 6th, 12th, and 24th month, respectively. Five reruptures and two Achilles tendons tethering to skins were found in the Achillon group, and two reruptures and one sural nerve injury in the MMIR group. No wound infection and dehiscence occurred. Overall complication rate in the Achillon group is higher (16.3% vs. 4.4%, p = 0.044). The operation time of Achillon is less than MMIR (34.84 vs. 39.71, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Both techniques combining with accelerated rehabilitation showed to be reliable and effective. MMIR is safer and more economical, and Achillon is faster.