A Comparison of Clinical Outcomes and Complication Rates in Open Versus Minimally Invasive Achilles Tendon Repair Using PROMIS Scores

Category: Sports Introduction/Purpose: While there is no current consensus on whether to use an open or minimally invasive (MIS) approach for Achilles tendon repair after acute rupture, there is a recent trend towards decreasing complication rates for both procedures as well as favorable clinical ou...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Foot & ankle orthopaedics 2020-10, Vol.5 (4)
Hauptverfasser: Caolo, Kristin C., Eble, Stephanie K., Elliott, Andrew J., Demetracopoulos, Constantine A., Deland, Jonathan T., Drakos, Mark C., Ellis, Scott J.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Category: Sports Introduction/Purpose: While there is no current consensus on whether to use an open or minimally invasive (MIS) approach for Achilles tendon repair after acute rupture, there is a recent trend towards decreasing complication rates for both procedures as well as favorable clinical outcomes. While many studies have compared complication rates between these procedures, no study has examined differences in clinical outcomes using PROMIS scores with a large cohort of patients. PROMIS has been validated for use in assessing outcomes following Achilles repair and allows for evaluation of surgical outcomes compared to population means. We hypothesized that patients in both open and MIS groups would have improved PROMIS scores postoperatively, but that there would be minimal differences in PROMIS scores and complication rates between surgical techniques. Methods: 228 patients were identified who underwent surgery for acute unilateral Achilles tendon repair between January 2016 and December 2018. Nine surgeons were represented. The open repair group was defined by a larger incision (>4 cm) and no use of a commercially available minimally invasive device. The minimally invasive group was defined by a smaller incision (
ISSN:2473-0114
2473-0114
DOI:10.1177/2473011420S00153