Outcomes of open "crown" type v. percutaneous Bunnell type repair of acute Achilles tendon ruptures. Randomized control study

Paratenon preserving repair of the midsubstance acute Achilles tendon rupture: a systematic review and meta-analysis with best- and worst-case analyses for rerupture rates

INTRODUCTION

Paratenon preserving techniques to facilitate acute Achilles tendon rupture repair (AATR) functions by maintaining vascularity and biology for optimal healing response. Therefore, the purpose is to evaluate the outcomes following paratenon preserving repair of the midsubstance AATR. The hypothesis was that paratenon-preserving techniques demonstrate high return to play rates and low complication rates for the repair of the midsubstance AATR.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A systematic review of the PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library databases was performed by two authors using specific search terms and eligibility criteria. The assessment of the evidence was two-fold: level and quality of evidence. A meta-analysis of proportions for the various complication rates was performed using the restricted maximum likelihood method following the Freeman-Tukey double-arcsine transformation. Fixed effects models were employed if I2 < 25% (low heterogeneity), and random effects models were employed if I2 ≥ 25% (moderate to high heterogeneity).

RESULTS

The pooled return to play rate was 90.3%. The pooled rerupture rate as reported was 0.9% (best-case scenario 0.8% and worst-case scenario 6.8%). No meaningful subgroup analysis for rerupture rates could be performed based on the meta-regression. The pooled complication rate other than reruptures was 4.8%. The pooled infection rates were 0.3%, DVT rates were 1.6%, and sural nerve injury rates were 0.3%.

CONCLUSIONS

Paratenon preserving techniques that are minimally invasive in nature demonstrated safe and favorable outcomes with high return to play rates and low complication rates for the repair of the midsubstance AATR.

Transversal calcaneal anchored Achilles tendon reconstruction with free semitendinosus tendon autograft for acute rupture of Achilles tendon: clinical evaluation

Achilles tendon reconstruction is an effective method of repairing Achilles tendon rupture defects. We introduce a new approach for Achilles tendon reconstruction using transversal calcaneal anchored autogenous semitendinosus tendon graft. The study aimed to evaluate the clinical role of this new Achilles tendon reconstruction. We retrospectively enrolled patients who underwent Achilles tendon reconstruction using transversal calcaneal anchored autogenous semitendinosus tendon graft for acute Achilles tendon rupture defects from 2016 to 2021. The clinical and radiological results were assessed at the preoperative and the final postoperative follow-up with Visual Analog Score (VAS) scores, American Orthopaedic Foot & Ankle Society (AOFAS) scores and Achilles tendon Total Rupture Scores (ATRS). Besides, at the last postoperative follow-up, the difference in ankle range of motion between the two side of the patients and the incidence of postoperative complications were recorded. Results revealed patients had significantly lower VAS and higher AOFAS and ATRS (P < 0.01). Compared to the healthy ankle, the operative ankle showed significant deficits in ankle range of motion (P < 0.01). Additionally, radiological results showed no noticeable signs of tunnel enlargement in the calcaneus and no patient had re-rupture. Transversal calcaneal anchored Achilles tendon reconstruction with free semitendinosus tendon autograft is an effective treatment option for patients with acute Achilles tendon rupture with large defects and have high postoperative exercise demands.

Open and Percutaneous Approaches Have Similar Biomechanical Results for Primary Midsubstance Achilles Tendon Repair: A Meta-analysis

Purpose

To evaluate the biomechanical properties of open versus percutaneous Achilles tendon repair.

Methods

A systematic review of original research articles was performed using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. To qualify for study inclusion, articles were required to be published in English, use a laboratory design using either human or animal tissue, and directly compare the biomechanical properties of open Achilles repair using a Krackow or Kessler technique with percutaneous repair using either a locking or nonlocking suture construct. The biomechanical outcomes evaluated were displacement (millimeters) and load to failure (Newtons).

Results

Twelve studies met inclusion criteria, including 234 specimens (open: 97, percutaneous locking: 73; percutaneous nonlocking: 64) that underwent primary midsubstance Achilles tendon repair. Pooled analysis demonstrated no statistically significant difference in displacement (P = .240) or load to failure (P = .912) between the open and percutaneous techniques. Among the percutaneous approaches, there was no difference in displacement (P = .109) between the locking and nonlocking tendon repair systems.

Conclusions

The results of this study suggest that both open and percutaneous techniques are biomechanically viable approaches for primary midsubstance Achilles tendon repair.

Clinical Relevance

In clinical studies, similar rerupture rates have been observed after open or percutaneous Achilles tendon repair. It may be beneficial for surgeons to understand whether biomechanical differences exist between these repair techniques.

Immediate mobilization after repair of Achilles tendon rupture may increase the incidence of re-rupture: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Achilles tendon rupture (ATR) is a significant injury that can require surgery and can have the risk of re-rupture even after successful treatment. Consequently, to minimize this risk, it is important to have a thorough understanding of the rehabilitation protocol and the impact of different rehabilitation approaches on preventing re-rupture.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Two independent team members searched several databases (PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and CINAHL) to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on operative treatment of ATR. We included articles that covered open or minimally invasive surgery for ATR, with a detailed rehabilitation protocol and reports of re-rupture. The study protocol has been registered at PROSPERO and has been reported in the line with PRISMA Guidelines, Supplemental Digital Content 1, http://links.lww.com/JS9/C85 , Supplemental Digital Content 2, http://links.lww.com/JS9/C86 and assessed using AMSTAR Tool, Supplemental Digital Content 3, http://links.lww.com/JS9/C87 .

RESULTS

A total of 43 RCTs were eligible for the meta-analysis, encompassing a combined cohort of 2553 patients. Overall, the postoperative incidence of ATR patients developing re-rupture was 3.15% (95% CI: 2.26-4.17; I2 =44.48%). Early immobilization group patients who had ATR had a 4.07% (95% CI: 1.76-7.27; I2 =51.20%) postoperative incidence of re-rupture; Early immobilization + active range of motion (AROM) group had an incidence of 5.95% (95% CI: 2.91-9.99; I2 =0.00%); Early immobilization + weight-bearing group had an incidence of 3.49% (95% CI: 1.96-5.43; I2 =20.06%); Early weight-bearing + AROM group had an incidence of 3.61% (95% CI: 1.00-7.73; I2 =64.60%); Accelerated rehabilitation (immobilization) group had an incidence of 2.18% (95% CI: 1.11-3.59; I2 =21.56%); Accelerated rehabilitation (non-immobilization) group had a rate of 1.36% (95% CI: 0.12-3.90; I2 =0.00%). Additionally, patients in the immediate AROM group had a postoperative re-rupture incidence of 3.92% (95% CI: 1.76-6.89; I2 =33.24%); Non-immediate AROM group had an incidence of 2.45% (95% CI: 1.25-4.03; I2 =22.09%).

CONCLUSIONS

This meta-analysis suggests the use of accelerated rehabilitation intervention in early postoperative rehabilitation of the Achilles tendon. However, for early ankle joint mobilization, it is recommended to apply after one to two weeks of immobilization.

Return to Play and Functional Outcomes Following Treatment of Acute Achilles Tendon Ruptures: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Return to play (RTP) and functional outcomes are critical to treatment success for acute Achilles tendon rupture (AATR). This systematic review and meta-analysis explored treatment superiority essential in optimal treatment selection concerning individual patients and their expectations regarding RTP and functional outcomes. This study was in accordance with the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses guidelines. The included studies were assessed regarding the level and quality of evidence. Fixed-effects models were employed for I2 < 25% and random-effects models for I2 ≥ 25%. The RTP rate meta-analysis of surgical vs conservative treatment revealed no significant difference. This was similar to the subgroup analysis of open repair and conservative treatment. The RTP rate and Achilles Tendon Total Rupture Score (ATRS) meta-analysis of open repair + earlier rehabilitation (ER) vs + later rehabilitation (LR) also revealed no significant differences. The mean time to RTP meta-analysis of open repair + ER vs + LR showed that open repair + ER was significantly favored (-4.19 weeks; p = .002). The ATRS meta-analysis of conservative treatment with ER vs with LR revealed no significant difference. This meta-analysis has revealed that the RTP rates following treatment of AATR are high. Therefore, the decision for surgical vs conservative treatment or open repair + ER vs + LR for AATR should not be selected based on the expectation of RTP. However, open repair + ER can be advocated over + LR for reduced mean time to RTP.

Return to sport after surgical repair of the Achilles tendon

Achilles tendon rupture is among the most common sports injuries. In patients with high functional demands, surgical repair is preferred to facilitate early return to sporting function. This article reviews the literature and provides evidence-based guidance for return to sport after operative management of Achilles tendon rupture. A search was performed using PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library for all studies reporting on return to sport after operative management of Achilles tendon rupture. The review included 24 studies reporting on 947 patients, and found that 65-100% of patients were able to return to sport between 3 and 13.4 months post-injury, with incidence of rupture recurrence 0-5.74%. These findings will help patients and healthcare professionals plan a recovery timeline, discuss athletic functionality post-recovery, and understand complications of repair and risk of tendon re-rupture.

Outcomes and Complications of Open Versus Minimally Invasive Repair of Acute Achilles Tendon Ruptures: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

BACKGROUND

An acute Achilles tendon rupture is one of the most common sports injuries, affecting 18 per 100,000 persons, and its operative repair has been evolving and increasing in frequency since the mid-1900s. Traditionally, open surgical repair has provided improved functional outcomes, reduced rerupture rates, and a quicker recovery and return to activities at the expense of increased wound complications such as infections and skin necrosis compared with nonoperative management. In 1977, Ma and Griffith introduced the percutaneous approach, and over the following decades, multiple improved techniques, and modifications thereof, have been described with comparable outcomes with open repair.

PURPOSE

The current study aimed to provide updated level 1 evidence comparing open repair with minimally invasive surgery (MIS) through a comprehensive search of the literature published in English, Arabic, Spanish, Portuguese, and German while avoiding limitations of previous studies such as heterogeneous study designs and a small number of included trials.

STUDY DESIGN

Meta-analysis; Level of evidence, 1.

METHODS

Following the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines, 2 independent team members searched several databases to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing open repair and MIS of Achilles tendon ruptures. The primary outcomes were (1) functional outcomes, (2) reruptures, (3) sural nerve injuries, and (4) infections (deep/superficial), whereas the secondary outcomes were (1) skin complications, (2) adhesions, (3) other complications, (4) ankle range of motion, and (5) surgical time.

RESULTS

There were 10 RCTs that qualified for the meta-analysis with a total of 522 patients. Overall, 260 (49.8%) patients underwent open repair, while 262 (50.2%) underwent MIS. The mean postoperative AOFAS score was 94.8 and 95.7 for open repair and MIS, respectively, with a nonsignificant difference (mean difference [MD], -0.73 [95% CI, -1.70 to 0.25]; P = .14; I² = 0%). The pooled mean total complication rate was 15.5% (0%-36.4%) for open repair and 10.4% (0%-45.5%) for MIS, with a nonsignificant statistical difference (odds ratio [OR], 1.50 [95% CI, 0.87-2.57]; P = .14; I² = 40%). The mean rerupture rate was 2.5% (0%-6.8%) for open repair versus 1.5% (0%-4.6%) for MIS, with a nonsignificant statistical difference (OR, 1.56 [95% CI, 0.42-5.70]; P = .50; I² = 0%). No cases of sural nerve injuries were reported in the open repair group. The mean sural nerve injury rate was 3.4% (0%-7.3%) in the MIS group, which was statistically significant (OR, 0.16 [95% CI, 0.03-0.46]; P = .02; I² = 0%). The mean overall superficial infection rate was 6.0% (0%-18.2%) and 0.4% (0%-4.5%) for open repair and MIS, respectively, with a statistically significant difference (OR, 5.70 [95% CI, 1.80-18.02]; P < .001; I² = 0%). The mean overall deep infection rate reported in the open repair group was 1.4% (0%-5.0%), while no deep infection was reported in the MIS group, with no statistically significant difference (OR, 3.14 [95% CI, 0.48-20.54]; P = .23; I² = 0%). There were no significant differences between the open repair and MIS groups in the skin necrosis and dehiscence rate, adhesion rate, or keloid scar rate. The mean surgical time was 51.0 and 29.7 minutes for open repair and MIS, respectively, with a statistically significant difference (MD, 21.13 [95% CI, 15.50-26.75]; P < .001; I² = 15%).

CONCLUSION

Open Achilles tendon repair was associated with a longer surgical time, higher risk of superficial infections, and higher risk of ankle stiffness, while MIS was associated with a greater risk of temporary sural nerve palsy. The rerupture rate and functional outcomes were mostly equivalent. We found MIS to be a safe and reliable technique. However, high-quality standardized RCTs are still needed before recommending MIS as the gold standard for managing Achilles tendon ruptures.

Rerupture outcome of conservative versus open repair versus minimally invasive repair of acute Achilles tendon ruptures: A systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To compare the rerupture rate after conservative treatment, open repair, and minimally invasive surgery management of acute Achilles tendon ruptures.

DESIGN

Systematic review and network meta-analysis.

DATA SOURCES

We searched Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials from inception to August 2022.

METHODS

Randomised controlled trials involving different treatments for Achilles tendon rupture were included. The primary outcome was rerupture. Bayesian network meta-analysis with random effects was used to assess pooled relative risks (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals. We evaluated the heterogeneity and publication bias.

RESULTS

Thirteen trials with 1465 patients were included. In direct comparison, there was no difference between open repair and minimally invasive surgery for rerupture rate (RR, 0.72, 95% CI 0.10-4.4; I2 = 0%; Table 2). Compared to the conservative treatment, the RR was 0.27 (95% CI 0.10-0.62, I2 = 0%) for open repair and 0.14 (95% CI 0.01-0.88, I2 = 0%) for minimally invasive surgery. The network meta-analysis had obtained the similar results as the direct comparison.

CONCLUSION

Both open repair and minimally invasive surgery were associated with a significant reduction in rerupture rate compared with conservative management, but no difference in rerupture rate was found comparing open repair and minimally invasive surgery.

The Acute Achilles Tendon Rupture: An Evidence-Based Approach from the Diagnosis to the Treatment

Background and Objective: Acute Achilles tendon rupture (AATR) is a common injury with a significant impact on daily living. Although various systematic reviews and meta-analyses have been written on the topic, no actual consensus exists on the best treatment. We aimed to collect the highest quality of evidence on the subject and to produce a document to which to refer, from the diagnosis to the final treatment. Material and Methods: Inclusion criteria were systematic reviews discussing Achilles tendon rupture, concerning either diagnostic criteria, classification, or treatment; English language; clearly stated inclusion and exclusion criteria for patients' selection. Results: Thirteen systematic reviews were included in the study. A strong consensus exists about the higher risk of re-rupture associated with non-operative treatment and a higher risk of complications associated with surgical repair. Conclusions: The combination of minimally invasive repair and accelerated functional rehabilitation seems to offer the best results in the treatment of Achilles tendon rupture.

Treatment of Acute Achilles Tendon Ruptures: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Complication Rates With Best- and Worst-Case Analyses for Rerupture Rates

BACKGROUND

An acute Achilles tendon rupture (AATR) is a common injury. The controversy that has surrounded the optimal treatment options for AATRs warrants an updated meta-analysis that is comprehensive, accounts for loss to follow-up, and utilizes the now greater number of available studies for data pooling.

PURPOSE

To meta-analyze the rates of all complications after the treatment of AATRs with a "best-case scenario" and "worst-case scenario" analysis for rerupture rates that assumes that all patients lost to follow-up did not or did experience a rerupture, respectively.

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic review and meta-analysis; Level of evidence, 1.

METHODS

Two authors performed a systematic review of the PubMed and Embase databases according to the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines on February 17, 2020. The included studies were assessed in terms of the level of evidence, quality of evidence, and quality of the literature. A meta-analysis by fixed-effects models was performed if heterogeneity was low (I² < 25%) and by random-effects models if heterogeneity was moderate to high (I²≥ 25%).

RESULTS

Surgical treatment was significantly favored over nonsurgical treatment for reruptures. Nonsurgical treatment was significantly favored over surgical treatment for complications other than reruptures, notably infections. Minimally invasive surgery was significantly favored over open repair for complications other than reruptures (no difference for reruptures), in particular for minor complications.

CONCLUSION

This meta-analysis demonstrated that surgical treatment was superior to nonsurgical treatment in terms of reruptures. However, the number needed to treat analysis produced nonmeaningful values for all treatment options, except for surgical versus nonsurgical treatment and minimally invasive surgery versus open repair. No single treatment option was revealed to be profoundly favorable with respect to every complication. The results of this meta-analysis can guide clinicians and patients in their treatment decisions that should be made jointly and on a case-by-case basis.

Multiple comparisons of the efficacy and safety for six treatments in Acute Achilles Tendon Rupture patients: A systematic review and network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The choice of the best therapeutic regimen for Acute Achilles Tendon Rupture (AATR) remains controversial. Our study aims to evaluate the efficacy and safety of therapeutic regimens in AATR patients using a network meta-analysis of data from clinical randomized controlled trials.

MATERIAL/METHODS

The studies were abstracted from Medline, Embase, Web of Science, Google Scholar and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. RCTs meeting the inclusion and exclusion criteria were selected. Statistical analyses were conducted using Stata software, version 14.0 (Stata Corporation, College Station, Texas, USA).

RESULTS

38 randomized controlled trials involving 2480 participants were included. The studies were published between 1981 and 2019. A total of 6 therapeutic regimens -open repair (OR), minimally invasive repair (MIR) and nonoperative treatment (non) combined with traditional standard rehabilitation (TSR) and accelerated functional rehabilitation (AFR) - were included in the literature. The treatments were ranked based on the Surface Under the Cumulative Ranking Curve (SUCRA) probability. In terms of the re-rupture rate, the therapeutic regimens were ranked as follows: OR&AFR, OR&TSR, MIR&AFR, MIR&TSR, nonoperative treatment &AFR and nonoperative treatment &TSR. In terms of the wound-related complication, the therapeutic regimens were ranked as follows: MIR&AFR, nonoperative treatment &AFR, MIR&TSR, nonoperative treatment &TSR, OR&AFR and OR&TSR. In terms of the sural nerve injury, the therapeutic regimens were ranked as follows: non, OR and MIR. In terms of the deep venous thrombosis, the therapeutic regimens were ranked as follows: MIR&AFR, OR&AFR, nonoperative treatment &AFR, OR&TSR, MIR&TSR and nonoperative treatment &TSR. In terms of the returning back to sport, the therapeutic regimens were ranked as follows: MIR&TSR, OR&AFR, OR&TSR, nonoperative treatment &AFR, nonoperative treatment &TSR and MIR&AFR.

CONCLUSIONS

MIR can repair the ruptured Achilles tendon and narrow the tendon gap with low risk of complications. AFR is superior to TSR without increasing the risk of rerupture. MIR&AFR is the best therapeutic regime for AATR. More RCTs focused on AATR are needed to further indicate this conclusion.

Open versus minimally-invasive surgery for Achilles tendon rupture: a meta-analysis study

INTRODUCTION

Despite the presence of various different surgical procedures, the preferable technique for repair of acute Achilles tendon ruptures is unknown and, therefore, object of discussions. The purpose of this meta-analysis was to compare clinical outcomes and complication-rates between the minimally invasive and the standard open repair of acute Achilles tendon ruptures.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This meta-analysis was performed according to the PRISMA guidelines. In September 2019 the main databases were accessed. All clinical trials of evidence level I to III comparing minimally invasive vs. open surgery of Achilles tendon rupture were included in the present study. Only articles reporting quantitative data under the outcomes of interest were included. Missing data under the outcomes of interest warranted the exclusion from the present work. For the statistical analysis we referred to the Review Manager Software Version 5.3. (The Nordic Cochrane Centre, Copenhagen). Continuous data were analysed through the inverse variance method. For the effect estimate the mean difference was used. Dichotomous data were analysed through the Mante-Haenszel method via odd ratio effect measure. The confidence interval was set at 95% in all the comparisons. Values of P < 0.05 were considered statistically significant.

RESULTS

A total of 25 articles were included for meta-analysis. The funnel plot revealed poor data dispersion, attesting to this study a low risk of publication bias. The quality of the methodological assessment was moderate. Data from 2223 (1055 open, 1168 minimally invasive) surgical procedures were extracted. The mean follow-up was of 24.29 ± 22.4 months. The open group reported a lower value of post-operative palpable knot at last follow-up and a lower rate of sural nerve palsy. In the minimally-invasive group a shorter surgery duration and a lower rate of post-operative wound necrosis and reduced risk of wound scarring and adhesions has been evidenced. The minimally-invasive cohort detected the lowest values of superficial and deep infections. In both groups no significant difference was shown in re-rupture rate.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared to the minimally-invasive Achilles tendon reconstruction, the open procedure evidenced a lower rate of sural nerve palsy and postoperative palpable knot, whereas in the minimally-invasive reconstruction group quicker surgery duration, a lower rate of post-operative wound necrosis, superficial and deep infections and less scar tissue adhesions could be observed. No relevant discrepancies were detected among the two techniques in terms of post-operative re-rupture.

Operative Versus Nonoperative Treatment of Acute Achilles Tendon Ruptures: A Pilot Economic Decision Analysis

Background

The operative treatment of Achilles tendon ruptures has been associated with lower rerupture rates and better function but also a risk of surgery-related complications compared with nonoperative treatment, which may provide improved outcomes with accelerated rehabilitation protocols. However, economic decision analyses integrating the updated costs of both treatment options are limited in the literature.

Purpose

To compare the cost-effectiveness of operative and nonoperative treatment of acute Achilles tendon tears.

Study Design

Economic and decision analysis; Level of evidence, 2.

Methods

An economic decision model was built to assess the cost-utility ratio (CUR) of open primary repair versus nonoperative treatment for acute Achilles tendon ruptures, based on direct costs from the practices of sports medicine and foot and ankle surgeons at a single tertiary academic center, with published outcome probabilities and patient utility data. Multiway sensitivity analyses were performed to reflect the range of data.

Results

Nonoperative treatment was more cost-effective in the average scenario (nonoperative CUR, US$520; operative CUR, US$1995), but crossover occurred during the sensitivity analysis (nonoperative CUR range, US$224-US$2079; operative CUR range, US$789-US$8380). Operative treatment cost an extra average marginal CUR of US$1475 compared with nonoperative treatment, assuming uneventful healing in both treatment arms. The sensitivity analysis demonstrated a decreased marginal CUR of operative treatment when the outcome utility was maximized, and rerupture rates were minimized compared with nonoperative treatment.

Conclusion

Nonoperative treatment was more cost-effective in average scenarios. Crossover indicated that open primary repair would be favorable for maximized outcome utility, such as that for young athletes or heavy laborers. The treatment decision for acute Achilles tendon ruptures should be individualized. These pilot results provide inferences for further longitudinal analyses incorporating future clinical evidence.