• Int J Surg · Apr 2017

    Review Meta Analysis

    Outcomes and complications of percutaneous versus open repair of acute Achilles tendon rupture: A meta-analysis.

    • Bo Yang, Yang Liu, Shunli Kan, Di Zhang, Hong Xu, Feifei Liu, Guangzhi Ning, and Shiqing Feng.
    • Department of Orthopedics, Tianjin Medical University General Hospital, 154 Anshan Road, Heping District, China. Electronic address: yangbo209@foxmail.com.
    • Int J Surg. 2017 Apr 1; 40: 178-186.

    BackgroundAcute Achilles tendon rupture (AATR) is a frequent injury occurring dominantly in young to middle-aged males. Outcomes and complications between percutaneous and open repair are still controversial. Thus, the purpose of this meta-analysis is to evaluate the outcomes and complications of these two operative methods.Materials And MethodsWe searched multiple databases: PubMed, Web of Science, EMBASE and the Cochrane Library up to October 2016. Two reviewers independently screened the studies for eligibility, evaluated the quality and extracted data from eligible studies, with confirmation by cross-checking. The major results and conclusions were concluded, and the different complication rates and functional outcomes were compared. Meta-analysis was processed by Rev Man 5.3 software.ResultsFive randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and seven retrospective cohort studies involving 815 patients met the inclusion criteria. The sural nerve injury rate in the percutaneous group was significantly higher (RR = 3.52, 95%CI 1.45 to 8.57, P = 0.006). However, deep infection rate in the open group was higher (RR = 0.33, 95%CI 0.11 to 0.96, P = 0.04) and subgroup analysis of five RCTs showed no significant difference (RR = 0.42, 95%CI 0.09 to 2.10, P = 0.29). No significant difference was seen regarding the rate of re-rupture. The time of operation in the percutaneous group was shorter (RR = -1.99, 95%CI -3.81 to -0.80, P = 0.001). American Orthopedic Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS) ankle-hindfoot score showed statistically different in the two groups. Other functional outcomes were similar in the two groups.ConclusionsPercutaneous repair has the advantages of operation time, deep infection and AOFAS score. The functional outcomes were similar in two treatment groups except AOFAS score. Despite the higher incidence of sural nerve injury, we still believe that percutaneous repair is superior to open repair for treating AATR.Copyright © 2017. Published by Elsevier Ltd.

      Pubmed     Free full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…