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.

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.

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.

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.

Polls results

On a scale of 1 to 10, rate how much this article will change your clinical practice?

NO change
BIG change
70% Article relates to my practice (28/40)
12% Article does not relate to my practice (5/40)
17% Undecided (7/40)

Will this article lead to more cost-effective healthcare?

60% Yes (24/40)
37% No (15/40)
2% Undecided (1/40)

Was this article biased? (commercial or personal)

20% Yes (8/40)
72% No (29/40)
7% Undecided (3/40)

What level of evidence do you think this article is?

12% Level 1 (5/40)
35% Level 2 (14/40)
25% Level 3 (10/40)
25% Level 4 (10/40)
2% Level 5 (1/40)