Background: The aim of the study was to compare the mini-open to the classic open repair techniques for Achilles tendon ruptures. Methods: We retrospectively evaluated at a minimum of 2 years follow-up 32 subcutaneous Achilles tendon ruptures; 17 underwent mini-open surgery (Group A) and 15 the open technique (Group B). Results: No difference in Achilles Tendon Total Rupture Score and in modified Leppillahti score was observed. With respect to the contralateral side the width of the operated Achilles tendon was 4.07 mm thicker in Group A and 7.67 mm in Group B (p<.05); the calf circumference reduction was respectively 10 mm and 23.75 mm (p<.05). Isokinetic peak force measurement of the calf muscle strength showed a loss of 8.21% in Group A versus 17.25% in Group B (p <.05). The mean Patient Satisfaction Score was 96.76 in Group A and 88.67 in Group B (p<.01); respectively 82.3% vs 66.7% of patients were able to return to previous levels of sporting activity. There were two post-operative complications in Group B and one in Group A. Conclusion: Mini-open technique minimizes the risk of complications, leads to an improved tendon healing process and functional recovery with higher patient satisfaction. Level of evidence: IV.

Munegato, D., Gridavilla, G., Guerrasio, S., Turati, M., Cazzaniga, C., Zanchi, N., et al. (2017). Mini open versus open repair techniques in achilles tendon rupture: Clinical and isokinetic evaluation. M.L.T.J. MUSCLES, LIGAMENTS AND TENDONS JOURNAL, 7(3), 554-561 [10.11138/mltj/2017.7.3.554].

Mini open versus open repair techniques in achilles tendon rupture: Clinical and isokinetic evaluation

Munegato, D;Guerrasio, S;Turati, M
;
Cazzaniga, C;Zanchi, N;Zatti, G;Bigoni, M
2017

Abstract

Background: The aim of the study was to compare the mini-open to the classic open repair techniques for Achilles tendon ruptures. Methods: We retrospectively evaluated at a minimum of 2 years follow-up 32 subcutaneous Achilles tendon ruptures; 17 underwent mini-open surgery (Group A) and 15 the open technique (Group B). Results: No difference in Achilles Tendon Total Rupture Score and in modified Leppillahti score was observed. With respect to the contralateral side the width of the operated Achilles tendon was 4.07 mm thicker in Group A and 7.67 mm in Group B (p<.05); the calf circumference reduction was respectively 10 mm and 23.75 mm (p<.05). Isokinetic peak force measurement of the calf muscle strength showed a loss of 8.21% in Group A versus 17.25% in Group B (p <.05). The mean Patient Satisfaction Score was 96.76 in Group A and 88.67 in Group B (p<.01); respectively 82.3% vs 66.7% of patients were able to return to previous levels of sporting activity. There were two post-operative complications in Group B and one in Group A. Conclusion: Mini-open technique minimizes the risk of complications, leads to an improved tendon healing process and functional recovery with higher patient satisfaction. Level of evidence: IV.
Articolo in rivista - Articolo scientifico
Achilles tendon; Achilles tendon repair; Achilles tendon rupture; Mini open technique; Tenorrhaphy;
Achilles tendon; Achilles tendon repair; achilles tendon rupture; mini open technique; tenorrhaphy
English
554
561
8
Munegato, D., Gridavilla, G., Guerrasio, S., Turati, M., Cazzaniga, C., Zanchi, N., et al. (2017). Mini open versus open repair techniques in achilles tendon rupture: Clinical and isokinetic evaluation. M.L.T.J. MUSCLES, LIGAMENTS AND TENDONS JOURNAL, 7(3), 554-561 [10.11138/mltj/2017.7.3.554].
Munegato, D; Gridavilla, G; Guerrasio, S; Turati, M; Cazzaniga, C; Zanchi, N; Zatti, G; Bigoni, M
File in questo prodotto:
File Dimensione Formato  
manuscript2017.pdf

Solo gestori archivio

Dimensione 1.06 MB
Formato Adobe PDF
1.06 MB Adobe PDF   Visualizza/Apri   Richiedi una copia

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/10281/182395
Citazioni
  • Scopus 5
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 2
Social impact