Comparing Mini-Open and Percutaneous Surgery for Achilles Tendon Rupture
Author Information
Author(s): Melinte Marian Andrei, Nistor Dan Viorel, de Souza Conde Rodrigo Arruda, Hernández Ricardo González, Wijaya Prajna, Marvin Kabuye, Moldovan Alexia Nicola, Melinte Razvan Marian
Primary Institution: George Emil Palade University of Medicine, Targu Mures, Romania
Hypothesis
Does the mini-open technique provide better outcomes than the percutaneous technique for acute Achilles tendon rupture?
Conclusion
The mini-open technique reduces re-ruptures and sural nerve injuries while improving functional scores compared to the percutaneous technique.
Supporting Evidence
- The mini-open technique was associated with a significantly lower re-rupture rate (1.48% vs. 6.11%).
- The sural nerve injury rate was significantly lower in the mini-open group (0.57% vs. 5.64%).
- Functional outcomes showed higher AOFAS scores in the mini-open group (MD 1.52 points).
- No significant differences were observed in venous thrombosis or wound infection rates.
- Operation time was comparable between the two techniques.
Takeaway
This study found that a certain type of surgery for a torn Achilles tendon is better because it has fewer problems and helps people recover faster.
Methodology
A systematic review and meta-analysis comparing clinical outcomes and complications of mini-open and percutaneous techniques for Achilles tendon repair.
Potential Biases
Some studies had a serious risk of bias due to confounding and selection issues.
Limitations
The small sample size and heterogeneity in surgical techniques and rehabilitation protocols may limit the generalizability of the findings.
Participant Demographics
The studies included a total of 484 patients, with 226 (46%) undergoing mini-open technique.
Statistical Information
P-Value
p=0.001
Confidence Interval
95% CI 0.09–0.86
Statistical Significance
p<0.05
Digital Object Identifier (DOI)
Want to read the original?
Access the complete publication on the publisher's website