The Medial Mini-Open Supine Achilles Repair: Outcomes of a Medially Based Mini-Open Technique Compared With Prone Techniques.

IF 2 Q2 ORTHOPEDICS
Christopher P Miller, Katherine Stanwood, Caroline Williams, John Zhao, Fernando Raduan
{"title":"The Medial Mini-Open Supine Achilles Repair: Outcomes of a Medially Based Mini-Open Technique Compared With Prone Techniques.","authors":"Christopher P Miller, Katherine Stanwood, Caroline Williams, John Zhao, Fernando Raduan","doi":"10.5435/JAAOSGlobal-D-24-00390","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Achilles tendon rupture treatment has changed substantially in the past decade, with an evolution toward less-invasive techniques and more convenient patient positioning. This review aims to report on the 1-year clinical outcomes of a medially based, mini-open, supine, Achilles tendon repair technique.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In this retrospective review, all patients who underwent surgical management of an Achilles tendon rupture were included and analyzed based on approach, including (1) standard open prone technique, (2) mini-open repair, prone, and (3) medial mini-open repair, supine. Primary outcomes were the Patient-Reported Outcome Measures Information Systems (PROMIS) Physical Function, PROMIS Pain Interference, and PROMIS Depression scores. Secondary outcomes of interest were surgical time and complications.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Seventy-eight patients were included in this study who underwent Achilles tendon repair and were seen in follow-up at least 1-year postoperatively. Demographics are displayed in Table 1. No statistical difference was observed regarding sex, laterality, age, and mechanism between those with 1-year follow-up data and those who were lost to follow-up before the 1-year mark. Primary outcomes were notable for statistically significant difference in the PROMIS Depression score between the mini-open repair, prone group, and the mini-open repair, supine group. The remainder of the primary outcomes of interest were not statistically significant. Secondary outcomes were notable for markedly shorter surgical time for the mini-open repair, supine group compared with both the standard open prone and mini-open repair, prone groups, with times being 89, 72, and 58 minutes, respectively. Surgical time was defined as starting from the time the patient was anesthetized in the room and included positioning and time up until extubation.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The medial mini-open repair, supine technique shows promise as a noninferior surgical option for acute Achilles tendon rupture repair with markedly decreased operating room time and 1-year outcomes with comparable results to both open and mini-open prone techniques.</p>","PeriodicalId":45062,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons Global Research and Reviews","volume":"9 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11913408/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons Global Research and Reviews","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5435/JAAOSGlobal-D-24-00390","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/3/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Achilles tendon rupture treatment has changed substantially in the past decade, with an evolution toward less-invasive techniques and more convenient patient positioning. This review aims to report on the 1-year clinical outcomes of a medially based, mini-open, supine, Achilles tendon repair technique.

Methods: In this retrospective review, all patients who underwent surgical management of an Achilles tendon rupture were included and analyzed based on approach, including (1) standard open prone technique, (2) mini-open repair, prone, and (3) medial mini-open repair, supine. Primary outcomes were the Patient-Reported Outcome Measures Information Systems (PROMIS) Physical Function, PROMIS Pain Interference, and PROMIS Depression scores. Secondary outcomes of interest were surgical time and complications.

Results: Seventy-eight patients were included in this study who underwent Achilles tendon repair and were seen in follow-up at least 1-year postoperatively. Demographics are displayed in Table 1. No statistical difference was observed regarding sex, laterality, age, and mechanism between those with 1-year follow-up data and those who were lost to follow-up before the 1-year mark. Primary outcomes were notable for statistically significant difference in the PROMIS Depression score between the mini-open repair, prone group, and the mini-open repair, supine group. The remainder of the primary outcomes of interest were not statistically significant. Secondary outcomes were notable for markedly shorter surgical time for the mini-open repair, supine group compared with both the standard open prone and mini-open repair, prone groups, with times being 89, 72, and 58 minutes, respectively. Surgical time was defined as starting from the time the patient was anesthetized in the room and included positioning and time up until extubation.

Conclusion: The medial mini-open repair, supine technique shows promise as a noninferior surgical option for acute Achilles tendon rupture repair with markedly decreased operating room time and 1-year outcomes with comparable results to both open and mini-open prone techniques.

内侧小开口仰卧跟腱修复:内侧小开口技术与俯卧技术的比较
背景:在过去的十年中,跟腱断裂的治疗发生了很大的变化,技术的发展趋向于微创和更方便的患者定位。本综述旨在报道一种基于内侧、小开口、仰卧位跟腱修复技术的1年临床结果。方法:在本回顾性研究中,纳入所有接受跟腱断裂手术治疗的患者,并基于入路进行分析,包括(1)标准俯卧开放技术,(2)俯卧小开放修复,(3)内侧小开放修复,仰卧位。主要结果是患者报告的结果测量信息系统(PROMIS)的身体功能,PROMIS疼痛干扰和PROMIS抑郁评分。次要结果为手术时间和并发症。结果:78例患者接受了跟腱修复,术后随访至少1年。人口统计数据显示在表1中。随访1年的患者与未随访1年的患者在性别、侧位、年龄、发病机制等方面均无统计学差异。主要结果显示,俯卧位小开口修复组和仰卧位小开口修复组的PROMIS抑郁评分有统计学差异。其余的主要结局无统计学意义。次要结果值得注意的是,与标准开放俯卧组和迷你开放俯卧组相比,仰卧组的手术时间明显缩短,分别为89分钟、72分钟和58分钟。手术时间定义为从患者在室内麻醉开始,包括体位和拔管时间。结论:内侧小切口仰卧位修复技术有望成为急性跟腱断裂修复的一种非次优手术选择,与开放和小切口俯卧位技术相比,手术时间和1年预后显著减少。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.60
自引率
6.70%
发文量
282
审稿时长
8 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信