Achilles Tendon Ruptures: Comparison between the Clinical Results of Classical Versus Mini-Invasive or Percutaneous Surgical Treatment

The aim of the study is to evaluate the surgical treatment comparing the results obtained with different techniques. We revised 68 cases with acute Achilles tendon rupture who underwent surgical correction between 2004 and 2011, with a 40 month average follow-up. 34 of these were submitted to a clas...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Ars medica tomitana 2015-01, Vol.20 (3), p.135-138
Hauptverfasser: B., Obada, Al. O., Serban
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 138
container_issue 3
container_start_page 135
container_title Ars medica tomitana
container_volume 20
creator B., Obada
Al. O., Serban
description The aim of the study is to evaluate the surgical treatment comparing the results obtained with different techniques. We revised 68 cases with acute Achilles tendon rupture who underwent surgical correction between 2004 and 2011, with a 40 month average follow-up. 34 of these were submitted to a classical open repair using the Kessler or Krakow technique, 25 to a mini-invasive technique (Achilon) and 9 to a percutaneous technique (Tenolig). We report a 29% rate of complications when using the classical technique: the major complications were one re-rupture, two surgical wound dehiscences, one infection and one sural nerve injury. In the mini-invasive/percutaneous techniques, two re-ruptures occurred (5.9% total, one in each technique) and one fistula at the needle insertion location. In regards to the percutaneous and mini-invasive techniques, the functional results and degree of satisfaction were higher, with fewer complications, reflecting a trend that has been expressed in the international literature.
doi_str_mv 10.2478/arsm-2014-0024
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>walterdegruyter_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_crossref_primary_10_2478_arsm_2014_0024</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>10_2478_arsm_2014_0024203135</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c1325-8001a3167efee1f30b3ac16a1b762b7184625169b877e54be9ab55808387636d3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1UMtOwzAQtBBIVKVXzv6BFDtObBdxqSIelYpApXCNnHTTpkqcyo9W_QG-G6flwIXTjmZnVrOD0C0l4zgR8k4Z20YxoUlESJxcoAGVCY0SwvjlH3yNRtZuCSFUMEnjyQB9T8tN3TRg8RL0qtN44XfOG7D3OOvanTK1DWQB7gCgsdsAzppa16Vq8AKsb5zFXRU4Ze2J_AJjvcWvQRPN9F7Zeg-4M_gdTOmd0tCF7Yc365N6aUC5FrS7QVeVaiyMfucQfT49LrOXaP72PMum86ikLE4jGZIrRrmACoBWjBRMlZQrWggeFyL8yeOU8kkhhYA0KWCiijSVRDIpOOMrNkTj893SdNYaqPKdqVtljjkleV9k3heZ90XmfZHB8HA2HFTjwKxgbfwxgHzbeaND1H-MMWGUpewHmoB8Yg</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype></control><display><type>article</type><title>Achilles Tendon Ruptures: Comparison between the Clinical Results of Classical Versus Mini-Invasive or Percutaneous Surgical Treatment</title><source>De Gruyter Open Access Journals</source><creator>B., Obada ; Al. O., Serban</creator><creatorcontrib>B., Obada ; Al. O., Serban</creatorcontrib><description>The aim of the study is to evaluate the surgical treatment comparing the results obtained with different techniques. We revised 68 cases with acute Achilles tendon rupture who underwent surgical correction between 2004 and 2011, with a 40 month average follow-up. 34 of these were submitted to a classical open repair using the Kessler or Krakow technique, 25 to a mini-invasive technique (Achilon) and 9 to a percutaneous technique (Tenolig). We report a 29% rate of complications when using the classical technique: the major complications were one re-rupture, two surgical wound dehiscences, one infection and one sural nerve injury. In the mini-invasive/percutaneous techniques, two re-ruptures occurred (5.9% total, one in each technique) and one fistula at the needle insertion location. In regards to the percutaneous and mini-invasive techniques, the functional results and degree of satisfaction were higher, with fewer complications, reflecting a trend that has been expressed in the international literature.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1841-4036</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1841-4036</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.2478/arsm-2014-0024</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>De Gruyter Open</publisher><subject>Achilles ; classical surgery ; mini-invasive ; percutaneous ; rupture ; tendon</subject><ispartof>Ars medica tomitana, 2015-01, Vol.20 (3), p.135-138</ispartof><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.degruyter.com/document/doi/10.2478/arsm-2014-0024/pdf$$EPDF$$P50$$Gwalterdegruyter$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.degruyter.com/document/doi/10.2478/arsm-2014-0024/html$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwalterdegruyter$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27923,27924,66929,68713</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>B., Obada</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Al. O., Serban</creatorcontrib><title>Achilles Tendon Ruptures: Comparison between the Clinical Results of Classical Versus Mini-Invasive or Percutaneous Surgical Treatment</title><title>Ars medica tomitana</title><description>The aim of the study is to evaluate the surgical treatment comparing the results obtained with different techniques. We revised 68 cases with acute Achilles tendon rupture who underwent surgical correction between 2004 and 2011, with a 40 month average follow-up. 34 of these were submitted to a classical open repair using the Kessler or Krakow technique, 25 to a mini-invasive technique (Achilon) and 9 to a percutaneous technique (Tenolig). We report a 29% rate of complications when using the classical technique: the major complications were one re-rupture, two surgical wound dehiscences, one infection and one sural nerve injury. In the mini-invasive/percutaneous techniques, two re-ruptures occurred (5.9% total, one in each technique) and one fistula at the needle insertion location. In regards to the percutaneous and mini-invasive techniques, the functional results and degree of satisfaction were higher, with fewer complications, reflecting a trend that has been expressed in the international literature.</description><subject>Achilles</subject><subject>classical surgery</subject><subject>mini-invasive</subject><subject>percutaneous</subject><subject>rupture</subject><subject>tendon</subject><issn>1841-4036</issn><issn>1841-4036</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2015</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp1UMtOwzAQtBBIVKVXzv6BFDtObBdxqSIelYpApXCNnHTTpkqcyo9W_QG-G6flwIXTjmZnVrOD0C0l4zgR8k4Z20YxoUlESJxcoAGVCY0SwvjlH3yNRtZuCSFUMEnjyQB9T8tN3TRg8RL0qtN44XfOG7D3OOvanTK1DWQB7gCgsdsAzppa16Vq8AKsb5zFXRU4Ze2J_AJjvcWvQRPN9F7Zeg-4M_gdTOmd0tCF7Yc365N6aUC5FrS7QVeVaiyMfucQfT49LrOXaP72PMum86ikLE4jGZIrRrmACoBWjBRMlZQrWggeFyL8yeOU8kkhhYA0KWCiijSVRDIpOOMrNkTj893SdNYaqPKdqVtljjkleV9k3heZ90XmfZHB8HA2HFTjwKxgbfwxgHzbeaND1H-MMWGUpewHmoB8Yg</recordid><startdate>20150131</startdate><enddate>20150131</enddate><creator>B., Obada</creator><creator>Al. O., Serban</creator><general>De Gruyter Open</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20150131</creationdate><title>Achilles Tendon Ruptures: Comparison between the Clinical Results of Classical Versus Mini-Invasive or Percutaneous Surgical Treatment</title><author>B., Obada ; Al. O., Serban</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c1325-8001a3167efee1f30b3ac16a1b762b7184625169b877e54be9ab55808387636d3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2015</creationdate><topic>Achilles</topic><topic>classical surgery</topic><topic>mini-invasive</topic><topic>percutaneous</topic><topic>rupture</topic><topic>tendon</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>B., Obada</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Al. O., Serban</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><jtitle>Ars medica tomitana</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>B., Obada</au><au>Al. O., Serban</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Achilles Tendon Ruptures: Comparison between the Clinical Results of Classical Versus Mini-Invasive or Percutaneous Surgical Treatment</atitle><jtitle>Ars medica tomitana</jtitle><date>2015-01-31</date><risdate>2015</risdate><volume>20</volume><issue>3</issue><spage>135</spage><epage>138</epage><pages>135-138</pages><issn>1841-4036</issn><eissn>1841-4036</eissn><abstract>The aim of the study is to evaluate the surgical treatment comparing the results obtained with different techniques. We revised 68 cases with acute Achilles tendon rupture who underwent surgical correction between 2004 and 2011, with a 40 month average follow-up. 34 of these were submitted to a classical open repair using the Kessler or Krakow technique, 25 to a mini-invasive technique (Achilon) and 9 to a percutaneous technique (Tenolig). We report a 29% rate of complications when using the classical technique: the major complications were one re-rupture, two surgical wound dehiscences, one infection and one sural nerve injury. In the mini-invasive/percutaneous techniques, two re-ruptures occurred (5.9% total, one in each technique) and one fistula at the needle insertion location. In regards to the percutaneous and mini-invasive techniques, the functional results and degree of satisfaction were higher, with fewer complications, reflecting a trend that has been expressed in the international literature.</abstract><pub>De Gruyter Open</pub><doi>10.2478/arsm-2014-0024</doi><tpages>4</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1841-4036
ispartof Ars medica tomitana, 2015-01, Vol.20 (3), p.135-138
issn 1841-4036
1841-4036
language eng
recordid cdi_crossref_primary_10_2478_arsm_2014_0024
source De Gruyter Open Access Journals
subjects Achilles
classical surgery
mini-invasive
percutaneous
rupture
tendon
title Achilles Tendon Ruptures: Comparison between the Clinical Results of Classical Versus Mini-Invasive or Percutaneous Surgical Treatment
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-13T07%3A02%3A44IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-walterdegruyter_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Achilles%20Tendon%20Ruptures:%20Comparison%20between%20the%20Clinical%20Results%20of%20Classical%20Versus%20Mini-Invasive%20or%20Percutaneous%20Surgical%20Treatment&rft.jtitle=Ars%20medica%20tomitana&rft.au=B.,%20Obada&rft.date=2015-01-31&rft.volume=20&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=135&rft.epage=138&rft.pages=135-138&rft.issn=1841-4036&rft.eissn=1841-4036&rft_id=info:doi/10.2478/arsm-2014-0024&rft_dat=%3Cwalterdegruyter_cross%3E10_2478_arsm_2014_0024203135%3C/walterdegruyter_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true