Minimally Invasive Repair of Acute Achilles Tendon Rupture Using Gift Box Technique | ||
| The Archives of Bone and Joint Surgery | ||
| مقاله 6، دوره 7، شماره 5، آذر 2019، صفحه 429-434 اصل مقاله (777.1 K) | ||
| نوع مقاله: RESEARCH PAPER | ||
| شناسه دیجیتال (DOI): 10.22038/abjs.2019.41864.2133 | ||
| نویسندگان | ||
| Mohammadhossein Chegini kord1؛ Adel Ebrahimpour* 1؛ Mehrdad Sadighi1؛ Mohammadreza Chehrassan1؛ Leili Nazari2؛ Arvin Najafi3؛ Mohammadreza Minator Sajjadi1 | ||
| 1Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran | ||
| 2Shahid Beheshti University of Medical sciences,Tehran,Iran | ||
| 3Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Alborz University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran | ||
| چکیده | ||
| Background: This study aimed to introduce a modified technique for minimally invasive Achilles tendon (AT) rupture repair using gift box sutures. The preliminary clinical and functional outcomes were investigated among a number of patients. Methods: In a consecutive case series study, 24 patients with acute AT rupture underwent modified minimally invasive AT repair using two mini-incisions and gift box sutures. The patients were followed up for 24 months. The AT rupture score (ATRS) and the American Orthopedic Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS) measure score were obtained from all patients. The other measured variables included pain intensity and satisfaction using a visual analog scale (VAS), calf atrophy, the range of sagittal ankle motion, development of wound complications, sural nerve injury, and re-rupture. Results: After two years, the mean scores of AOFAS and ATRS were obtained at 83±4 and 81.9±6.3, respectively. Approximately 87.5 % of the patients regained their previous level of activity. The mean VAS score was 7.7±0.9 regarding the satisfaction with the outcomes. Moreover, isokinetic testing of plantar flexion and dorsiflexion strength were 82.7±5.8 and 87.7±4.1%, respectively, compared to those of the normal side. The calf atrophy was not statistically significant. In total, five patients reported pain during their activities. The range of operated ankle motion decreased significantly, compared to that of the other side; however, the differences were not significant functionally. There was no patient with wound complications, nerve injury, or complaint about problem with footwear. Conclusion: Minimally invasive repair of acute AT rupture using two mini-incisions and gift box sutures offers good functional and clinical outcomes without wound complications which can be usually observed following open repair of AT ruptures. Level of evidence: III | ||
| کلیدواژهها | ||
| Achilles tendon rupture؛ Complications؛ Gift box technique؛ Infection؛ Minimally invasive surgery؛ Wound dehiscence | ||
| مراجع | ||
|
1. Weinfeld SB. Achilles tendon disorders. Med Clin North Am. 2014; 98(2):331-8. 2. Bruggeman NB, Turner NS, Dahm DL, Voll AE, Hoskin TL, Jacofsky DJ, et al. Wound complications after open Achilles tendon repair: an analysis of risk factors. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2004; 427(1):63-6. 3. Cetti R, Christensen SE, Ejsted R, Jensen NM, Jorgensen U. Operative versus nonoperative treatment of Achilles tendon rupture: a prospective randomized study and review of the literature. Am J Sports Med. 1993; 21(6):791-9. 4. Bhandari M, Guyatt GH, Siddiqui F, Morrow F, Busse J, Leighton RK, et al. Treatment of acute Achilles tendon ruptures: a systematic overview and metaanalysis. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2002; 400(1):190-200. 5. Chan KB, Lui TH, Chan LK. Endoscopic-assisted repair of acute Achilles tendon rupture with Krackow suture: an anatomic study. J Foot Ankle Surg. 2009; 15(4):183-6. 6. Khan RJ, Fick D, Keogh A, Crawford J, Brammar T, Parker M. Treatment of acute Achilles tendon ruptures: a meta-analysis of randomized, controlled trials. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2005; 87(10):2202-10. 7. Buchgraber A, Passler HH. Percutaneous repair of Achilles tendon rupture: immobilization versus functional postoperative treatment. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1997; 341(1):113-22. 8. Sorrenti SJ. Achilles tendon rupture: effect of early mobilization in rehabilitation after surgical repair. Foot Ankle Int. 2006; 27(6):407-10. 9. Majewski M, Schaeren S, Kohlhaas U, Ochsner PE. Postoperative rehabilitation after percutaneous Achilles tendon repair: early functional therapy versus cast immobilization. Disabil Rehabil. 2008; 30(20-22):1726-32. 10. Krackow KA, Thomas SC, Jones LC. Ligament-tendon fixation: analysis of a new stitch and comparison with standard techniques. Orthopedics. 1988; 11(6):909-17. 11. Labib SA, Rolf R, Dacus R, HuttonWC. The “Giftbox” repair of the Achilles tendon: a modification of the Krackow technique. Foot Ankle Int. 2009; 30(5):410-4. 12. Cretnik A, Kosanovic M, Smrkolj V. Percutaneous versus open repair of the ruptured Achilles tendon: a comparative study. Am J Sports Med. 2005; 33(9):1369-79. 13. Chana JS, Chen HC, Jain V. A new incision for surgery on tendo Achillis using a distally-based fasciocutaneous flap. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2002; 84(8):1142-4. 14. Chan SK, Chung SC, Ho YF. Minimally invasive repair of ruptured Achilles tendon. Hong Kong Med J. 2008; 14(4):255-8. 15. Assal M, Jung M, Stern R, Rippstein P, Delmi M, Hoffmeyer P. Limited open repair of Achilles tendon ruptures: a technique with a new instrument and findings of a prospective multicenter study. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2002; 84(2):161-70. 16. Bhattacharyya M, Gerber B. Mini-invasive surgical repair of the Achilles tendon--does it reduce postoperative morbidity? Int Orthop. 2009; 33(1):151-6. 17. Calder JD, Saxby TS. Early, active rehabilitation following mini-open repair of Achilles tendon rupture: a prospective study. Br J Sports Med. 2005; 39(11):857-9. 18. Winters SC, Gelberman RH, Woo SL, Chan SS, Grewal R, Seiler JG III. The effects of multiple-strand suture methods on the strength and excursion of repaired intrasynovial flexor tendons: a biomechanical study in dogs. J Hand Surg Am. 1998; 23(1):97-104. 19. Jaakkola JI, Hutton WC, Beskin JL, Lee GP. Achilles tendon rupture repair: biomechanical comparison of the triple bundle technique versus the Krakow locking loop technique. Foot Ankle Int. 2000; 21(1):14-7. 20. Lim J, Dalal R, Waseem M. Percutaneous vs. open repair of the ruptured Achilles tendon da prospective randomized controlled study. Foot Ankle Int. 2001; 22(7):559-68. 21. Wong J, Barrass V, Maffulli N. Quantitative review of operative and nonoperative management of Achilles tendon ruptures. Am J Sports Med. 2002; 30(4):565-75. 22. Tejwani NC, Lee J, Weatherall J, Sherman O. Acute achilles tendon ruptures: a comparison of minimally invasive and open approach repairs followed by early rehabilitation. Am J Orthop. 2014; 43(10):E221-5. 23. Chen H, Ji X, Zhang Q, Liang X, Tang P. Channelassisted minimally invasive repair of acute Achilles tendon rupture. J Orthop Surg Res. 2015; 10(1):167. 24. Huri G, Bicer OS, Ozgozen L, Ucar Y, Garbis NG, Hyun YS. A novel repair method for the treatment of acute Achilles tendon rupture with minimally invasive approach using button implant: a biomechanical study. Foot Ankle. 2013; 19(4):261-6. 25. He ZY, Chai MX, Liu YJ, Zhang XR, Zhang T, Song LX, et al. Percutaneous repair technique for acute achilles tendon rupture with assistance of kirschner wire. Orthop Surg. 2015; 7(4):359-63. | ||
|
آمار تعداد مشاهده مقاله: 484 تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله: 429 |
||