Open Versus Minimal Invasive Repair With Achillon Device

Background: We prospectively analyzed and compared the functional and clinical results of patients with standard open and minimally invasive repair with the Achillon suture system at mid-term followup. Materials and Methods: From February 2004 to May 2007, 40 consecutive patients were operated for t...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Foot & ankle international 2009-05, Vol.30 (5), p.391-397
Hauptverfasser: Aktas, Seref, Kocaoglu, Baris
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 397
container_issue 5
container_start_page 391
container_title Foot & ankle international
container_volume 30
creator Aktas, Seref
Kocaoglu, Baris
description Background: We prospectively analyzed and compared the functional and clinical results of patients with standard open and minimally invasive repair with the Achillon suture system at mid-term followup. Materials and Methods: From February 2004 to May 2007, 40 consecutive patients were operated for the treatment of acute Achilles tendon rupture with two different methods. None of the cases required adjunctive procedures like plantaris, flexor hallucis longus or gastrocnemius augmentation (Lindholm, Bosworth) to allow for acceptable end to end apposition. The patients were divided equally into two groups. In Group 1, only Krakow end-to-end suturing technique and in Group 2, Minimal invasive repair with Achillon suture system (Integra Life Sciences Corporation, Plainsboro, NJ) was used respectively. The average age of the patients was 40 years. Patients in study groups were followed up at mean of 22.4 (range, 10 to 48) months after surgery. At the end of the followup time, functional outcome scores and complications were evaluated. Results: The AOFAS hindfoot clinical outcome scores were 98.7 in Group 1, 96.8 in Group 2. Although there was a numerical increase in AOFAS Scores in Group 1, there was no significant difference. The surgical outcome concerning local tenderness, skin adhesions, scar and tendon thickness was better in Group 2 than in Group 1 with statistical significance. Conclusion: Although functional outcomes of both treatment groups were the same, minimally invasive repair with the Achillon suture system provided safe, reliable and practical treatment with low risk of complications in the treatment of acute Achilles tendon ruptures.
doi_str_mv 10.3113/FAI-2009-0391
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>sage_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_crossref_primary_10_3113_FAI_2009_0391</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sage_id>10.3113_FAI-2009-0391</sage_id><sourcerecordid>10.3113_FAI-2009-0391</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c210t-239339ccd4b45d974f2a1c84cb3e64792a0889e85cb735440d4f955a1f6144ee3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kE1LAzEURYMotlaXbiVrIZo3yTSTZamtFioF8WMZMpk3NmU6HZK24L83pQVXrt5dHC73HUJugT8IAPE4Hc1YxrlmXGg4I33QUjJVqOF5ylwBA85Vj1zFuOIclAB9SXoJSrRQfVIsOmzpJ4a4i_TVt35tGzpr9zb6PdI37KwP9Mtvl3Tklr5pNi19wr13eE0uattEvDndAfmYTt7HL2y-eJ6NR3PmMuBblgkthHaukqXMK61knVlwhXSlwKFUOrO8KDQWuSuVyKXklax1nluohyAlohgQdux1YRNjwNp0IY0MPwa4ORgwyYA5GDAHA4m_O_Ldrlxj9UefXk7A_RGI9hvNarMLbdr_T9svEX1hXQ</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype></control><display><type>article</type><title>Open Versus Minimal Invasive Repair With Achillon Device</title><source>Access via SAGE</source><source>MEDLINE</source><creator>Aktas, Seref ; Kocaoglu, Baris</creator><creatorcontrib>Aktas, Seref ; Kocaoglu, Baris</creatorcontrib><description>Background: We prospectively analyzed and compared the functional and clinical results of patients with standard open and minimally invasive repair with the Achillon suture system at mid-term followup. Materials and Methods: From February 2004 to May 2007, 40 consecutive patients were operated for the treatment of acute Achilles tendon rupture with two different methods. None of the cases required adjunctive procedures like plantaris, flexor hallucis longus or gastrocnemius augmentation (Lindholm, Bosworth) to allow for acceptable end to end apposition. The patients were divided equally into two groups. In Group 1, only Krakow end-to-end suturing technique and in Group 2, Minimal invasive repair with Achillon suture system (Integra Life Sciences Corporation, Plainsboro, NJ) was used respectively. The average age of the patients was 40 years. Patients in study groups were followed up at mean of 22.4 (range, 10 to 48) months after surgery. At the end of the followup time, functional outcome scores and complications were evaluated. Results: The AOFAS hindfoot clinical outcome scores were 98.7 in Group 1, 96.8 in Group 2. Although there was a numerical increase in AOFAS Scores in Group 1, there was no significant difference. The surgical outcome concerning local tenderness, skin adhesions, scar and tendon thickness was better in Group 2 than in Group 1 with statistical significance. Conclusion: Although functional outcomes of both treatment groups were the same, minimally invasive repair with the Achillon suture system provided safe, reliable and practical treatment with low risk of complications in the treatment of acute Achilles tendon ruptures.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1071-1007</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1944-7876</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.3113/FAI-2009-0391</identifier><identifier>PMID: 19439137</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Los Angeles, CA: SAGE Publications</publisher><subject>Achilles Tendon - injuries ; Adult ; Aged ; Female ; Follow-Up Studies ; Humans ; Male ; Middle Aged ; Minimally Invasive Surgical Procedures - adverse effects ; Minimally Invasive Surgical Procedures - instrumentation ; Prospective Studies ; Range of Motion, Articular ; Recovery of Function ; Rupture ; Suture Techniques - adverse effects ; Suture Techniques - instrumentation ; Treatment Outcome</subject><ispartof>Foot &amp; ankle international, 2009-05, Vol.30 (5), p.391-397</ispartof><rights>2009 American Orthopaedic Foot &amp; Ankle Society</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c210t-239339ccd4b45d974f2a1c84cb3e64792a0889e85cb735440d4f955a1f6144ee3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c210t-239339ccd4b45d974f2a1c84cb3e64792a0889e85cb735440d4f955a1f6144ee3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.3113/FAI-2009-0391$$EPDF$$P50$$Gsage$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.3113/FAI-2009-0391$$EHTML$$P50$$Gsage$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,21819,27924,27925,43621,43622</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19439137$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Aktas, Seref</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kocaoglu, Baris</creatorcontrib><title>Open Versus Minimal Invasive Repair With Achillon Device</title><title>Foot &amp; ankle international</title><addtitle>Foot Ankle Int</addtitle><description>Background: We prospectively analyzed and compared the functional and clinical results of patients with standard open and minimally invasive repair with the Achillon suture system at mid-term followup. Materials and Methods: From February 2004 to May 2007, 40 consecutive patients were operated for the treatment of acute Achilles tendon rupture with two different methods. None of the cases required adjunctive procedures like plantaris, flexor hallucis longus or gastrocnemius augmentation (Lindholm, Bosworth) to allow for acceptable end to end apposition. The patients were divided equally into two groups. In Group 1, only Krakow end-to-end suturing technique and in Group 2, Minimal invasive repair with Achillon suture system (Integra Life Sciences Corporation, Plainsboro, NJ) was used respectively. The average age of the patients was 40 years. Patients in study groups were followed up at mean of 22.4 (range, 10 to 48) months after surgery. At the end of the followup time, functional outcome scores and complications were evaluated. Results: The AOFAS hindfoot clinical outcome scores were 98.7 in Group 1, 96.8 in Group 2. Although there was a numerical increase in AOFAS Scores in Group 1, there was no significant difference. The surgical outcome concerning local tenderness, skin adhesions, scar and tendon thickness was better in Group 2 than in Group 1 with statistical significance. Conclusion: Although functional outcomes of both treatment groups were the same, minimally invasive repair with the Achillon suture system provided safe, reliable and practical treatment with low risk of complications in the treatment of acute Achilles tendon ruptures.</description><subject>Achilles Tendon - injuries</subject><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Aged</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Follow-Up Studies</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>Minimally Invasive Surgical Procedures - adverse effects</subject><subject>Minimally Invasive Surgical Procedures - instrumentation</subject><subject>Prospective Studies</subject><subject>Range of Motion, Articular</subject><subject>Recovery of Function</subject><subject>Rupture</subject><subject>Suture Techniques - adverse effects</subject><subject>Suture Techniques - instrumentation</subject><subject>Treatment Outcome</subject><issn>1071-1007</issn><issn>1944-7876</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2009</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp1kE1LAzEURYMotlaXbiVrIZo3yTSTZamtFioF8WMZMpk3NmU6HZK24L83pQVXrt5dHC73HUJugT8IAPE4Hc1YxrlmXGg4I33QUjJVqOF5ylwBA85Vj1zFuOIclAB9SXoJSrRQfVIsOmzpJ4a4i_TVt35tGzpr9zb6PdI37KwP9Mtvl3Tklr5pNi19wr13eE0uattEvDndAfmYTt7HL2y-eJ6NR3PmMuBblgkthHaukqXMK61knVlwhXSlwKFUOrO8KDQWuSuVyKXklax1nluohyAlohgQdux1YRNjwNp0IY0MPwa4ORgwyYA5GDAHA4m_O_Ldrlxj9UefXk7A_RGI9hvNarMLbdr_T9svEX1hXQ</recordid><startdate>200905</startdate><enddate>200905</enddate><creator>Aktas, Seref</creator><creator>Kocaoglu, Baris</creator><general>SAGE Publications</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope></search><sort><creationdate>200905</creationdate><title>Open Versus Minimal Invasive Repair With Achillon Device</title><author>Aktas, Seref ; Kocaoglu, Baris</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c210t-239339ccd4b45d974f2a1c84cb3e64792a0889e85cb735440d4f955a1f6144ee3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2009</creationdate><topic>Achilles Tendon - injuries</topic><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Aged</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Follow-Up Studies</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>Minimally Invasive Surgical Procedures - adverse effects</topic><topic>Minimally Invasive Surgical Procedures - instrumentation</topic><topic>Prospective Studies</topic><topic>Range of Motion, Articular</topic><topic>Recovery of Function</topic><topic>Rupture</topic><topic>Suture Techniques - adverse effects</topic><topic>Suture Techniques - instrumentation</topic><topic>Treatment Outcome</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Aktas, Seref</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kocaoglu, Baris</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><jtitle>Foot &amp; ankle international</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Aktas, Seref</au><au>Kocaoglu, Baris</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Open Versus Minimal Invasive Repair With Achillon Device</atitle><jtitle>Foot &amp; ankle international</jtitle><addtitle>Foot Ankle Int</addtitle><date>2009-05</date><risdate>2009</risdate><volume>30</volume><issue>5</issue><spage>391</spage><epage>397</epage><pages>391-397</pages><issn>1071-1007</issn><eissn>1944-7876</eissn><abstract>Background: We prospectively analyzed and compared the functional and clinical results of patients with standard open and minimally invasive repair with the Achillon suture system at mid-term followup. Materials and Methods: From February 2004 to May 2007, 40 consecutive patients were operated for the treatment of acute Achilles tendon rupture with two different methods. None of the cases required adjunctive procedures like plantaris, flexor hallucis longus or gastrocnemius augmentation (Lindholm, Bosworth) to allow for acceptable end to end apposition. The patients were divided equally into two groups. In Group 1, only Krakow end-to-end suturing technique and in Group 2, Minimal invasive repair with Achillon suture system (Integra Life Sciences Corporation, Plainsboro, NJ) was used respectively. The average age of the patients was 40 years. Patients in study groups were followed up at mean of 22.4 (range, 10 to 48) months after surgery. At the end of the followup time, functional outcome scores and complications were evaluated. Results: The AOFAS hindfoot clinical outcome scores were 98.7 in Group 1, 96.8 in Group 2. Although there was a numerical increase in AOFAS Scores in Group 1, there was no significant difference. The surgical outcome concerning local tenderness, skin adhesions, scar and tendon thickness was better in Group 2 than in Group 1 with statistical significance. Conclusion: Although functional outcomes of both treatment groups were the same, minimally invasive repair with the Achillon suture system provided safe, reliable and practical treatment with low risk of complications in the treatment of acute Achilles tendon ruptures.</abstract><cop>Los Angeles, CA</cop><pub>SAGE Publications</pub><pmid>19439137</pmid><doi>10.3113/FAI-2009-0391</doi><tpages>7</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1071-1007
ispartof Foot & ankle international, 2009-05, Vol.30 (5), p.391-397
issn 1071-1007
1944-7876
language eng
recordid cdi_crossref_primary_10_3113_FAI_2009_0391
source Access via SAGE; MEDLINE
subjects Achilles Tendon - injuries
Adult
Aged
Female
Follow-Up Studies
Humans
Male
Middle Aged
Minimally Invasive Surgical Procedures - adverse effects
Minimally Invasive Surgical Procedures - instrumentation
Prospective Studies
Range of Motion, Articular
Recovery of Function
Rupture
Suture Techniques - adverse effects
Suture Techniques - instrumentation
Treatment Outcome
title Open Versus Minimal Invasive Repair With Achillon Device
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-04T06%3A22%3A38IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-sage_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Open%20Versus%20Minimal%20Invasive%20Repair%20With%20Achillon%20Device&rft.jtitle=Foot%20&%20ankle%20international&rft.au=Aktas,%20Seref&rft.date=2009-05&rft.volume=30&rft.issue=5&rft.spage=391&rft.epage=397&rft.pages=391-397&rft.issn=1071-1007&rft.eissn=1944-7876&rft_id=info:doi/10.3113/FAI-2009-0391&rft_dat=%3Csage_cross%3E10.3113_FAI-2009-0391%3C/sage_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/19439137&rft_sage_id=10.3113_FAI-2009-0391&rfr_iscdi=true