Treatment of acute Achilles tendon rupture - a multicentre, non-inferiority analysis

Socioeconomic deprivation status predicts both the incidence and nature of Achilles tendon rupture

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to describe the epidemiology of Achilles tendon rupture (ATR) and its relationship with socioeconomic deprivation status (SEDS). The hypothesis was that ATR occurs more frequently in socioeconomically deprived patients. Secondary aims were to determine variations in circumstances of injury between more and less deprived patients.

METHODS

A 6-year retrospective review of consecutive patients presenting with ATR was undertaken. The health-board population was defined using governmental population data and SEDS was defined using the Scottish Index of Multiple Deprivation. The primary outcome was an epidemiological description and comparison of incidence in more and less deprived cohorts. Secondary outcomes included reporting of the relationship between SEDS and patient and injury characteristics with univariate and binary logistic regression analyses.

RESULTS

There were 783 patients (567 male; 216 female) with ATR. Mean incidence for adults (≥ 18 years) was 18.75/100,000 per year (range 16.56-23.57) and for all ages was 15.26/100,000 per year (range 13.51 to 19.07). Incidence in the least deprived population quintiles (4th and 5th quintiles; 18.07 per 100,000/year) was higher than that in the most deprived quintiles (1st and 2nd; 11.32/100,000 per year; OR 1.60, 95%CI 1.35-1.89; p < 0.001). When adjusting for confounding factors, least deprived patients were more likely to be > 50 years old (OR 1.97; 95%CI 1.24-3.12; p = 0.004), to sustain ATR playing sports (OR 1.72, 95%CI 1.11-2.67; p = 0.02) and in the spring (OR 1.65, 95%CI  1.01-2.70; p = 0.045) and to give a history of preceding tendinitis (OR  4.04, 95%CI 1.49-10.95; p = 0.006). They were less likely to sustain low-energy injuries (OR 0.44, 95%CI 0.23-0.87; p = 0.02) and to be obese (OR 0.25-0.41, 95%CI  0.07-0.90; p ≤ 0.03).

CONCLUSIONS

The incidence of ATR was higher in less socioeconomically deprived populations and the hypothesis was therefore rejected. Significant variations in patient and predisposing factors, mechanisms of injury and seasonality were demonstrated between most and least deprived groups, suggesting that circumstances and nature of ATR may vary with SEDS and these are not a homogenous group of injuries.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Prognostic Study Level III.

Fast Functional Rehabilitation Protocol versus Plaster Cast Immobilization Protocol after Achilles Tendon Tenorrhaphy: Is It Different? Clinical, Ultrasonographic, and Elastographic Comparison

Background: the incidence of Achilles tendon (AT) rupture is rising; however, there is no clear consensus regarding the optimal treatment. The aim of this retrospective study was to compare instrumental and patient-reported outcome scores after fast functional rehabilitation (group A) versus plaster cast immobilization (group B) programs in patients who underwent AT tenorrhaphy. Methods: 33 patients, with similar clinical and demographic features, underwent open AT tenorrhaphy between January and July 2018. Of these, 15 patients were treated with fast functional rehabilitation program (group A), and 18 patients were treated with plaster cast immobilization protocol (group B). Sural triceps hypotrophy and functional scores (American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS) Ankle–Hindfoot Score, and Achilles tendon Total Rupture Score (ATRS)) were recorded at a 12-month follow-up. Ultrasonography (US) and elastosonography (ES) were used to compare the characteristics of the tendons after surgery. Results: At 12 months, no significant differences in any of the patient-reported outcomes or the instrumental measurement tests were seen between the two groups. Conclusions: fast functional rehabilitation after AT surgical repair is safe, effective, and may be the first choice of treatment, especially in young, collaborative, and active patients.

Nonoperative or Surgical Treatment of Acute Achilles' Tendon Rupture

BACKGROUND

Whether surgical repair of an acute Achilles' tendon rupture by an open-repair or minimally invasive approach is associated with better outcomes than nonsurgical treatment is not clear.

METHODS

We performed a multicenter, randomized, controlled trial that compared nonoperative treatment, open repair, and minimally invasive surgery in adults with acute Achilles' tendon rupture who presented to four trial centers. The primary outcome was the change from baseline in the Achilles' tendon Total Rupture Score (scores range from 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating better health status) at 12 months. Secondary outcomes included the incidence of tendon rerupture.

RESULTS

A total of 554 patients underwent randomization, and 526 patients were included in the final analysis. The mean changes in the Achilles' tendon Total Rupture Score were -17.0 points in the nonoperative group, -16.0 points in the open-repair group, and -14.7 points in the minimally invasive surgery group (P = 0.57). Pairwise comparisons provided no evidence of differences between the groups. The changes from baseline in physical performance and patient-reported physical function were similar in the three groups. The number of tendon reruptures was higher in the nonoperative group (6.2%) than in the open-repair or minimally invasive surgery group (0.6% in each). There were 9 nerve injuries in the minimally invasive surgery group (in 5.2% of the patients) as compared with 5 in the open-repair group (in 2.8%) and 1 in the nonoperative group (in 0.6%).

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with Achilles' tendon rupture, surgery (open repair or minimally invasive surgery) was not associated with better outcomes than nonoperative treatment at 12 months. (Funded by the South-Eastern Norway Regional Health Authority and Akershus University Hospital; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01785264.).

Correction to: Treatment of acute Achilles tendon rupture - a multicentre, non-inferiority analysis

An amendment to this paper has been published and can be accessed via the original article.

Achilles Tendon Rupture: Mechanisms of Injury, Principles of Rehabilitation and Return to Play

The Achilles tendon is the thickest, strongest and largest tendon in the human body, but despite its size and tensile strength, it frequently gets injured. Achilles tendon ruptures (ATRs) mainly occur during sports activities, and their incidence has increased over the last few decades. Achilles tendon tears necessitate a prolonged recovery time, sometimes leaving long-term functional limitations. Treatment options include conservative treatment and surgical repair. There is no consensus on which is the best treatment for ATRs, and their management is still controversial. Limited scientific evidence is available for optimized rehabilitation regimen and on the course of recovery after ATRs. Furthermore, there are no universally accepted outcomes regarding the return to play (RTP) process. Therefore, the aim of this narrative review is to give an insight into the mechanism of injuries of an ATR, related principles of rehabilitation, and RTP.

The economic cost and patient-reported outcomes of chronic Achilles tendon ruptures

Purpose

While most Achilles tendon ruptures are dramatic and diagnosed quickly, some are missed, with a risk of becoming chronic. A chronic Achilles tendon rupture is defined as a rupture that has been left untreated for more than 4 weeks. By mapping the health economic cost of chronic Achilles tendon ruptures the health-care system might be able to better distribute resources to detect these ruptures at an earlier time.

Method

All patients with a chronic Achilles tendon rupture who were treated surgically at Sahlgrenska University Hospital or Kungsbacka Hospital between 2013 and 2018 were invited to participate in the study. The patients were evaluated postoperatively using the validated Achilles tendon Total Rupture Score (ATRS). The health-care costs were assessed using clinical records. The production-loss costs were extracted from the Swedish Social Insurance Agency. The cost of chronic Achilles tendon ruptures was then compared with the cost of acute ruptures in a previous study by Westin et.al.

Results

Forty patients with a median (range) age of 66 (28–86) were included in the study. The mean total cost (± SD) for the patients with a chronic Achilles tendon rupture was 6494 EUR ± 6508, which is 1276 EUR higher than the mean total cost of acute ruptures. Patients with chronic Achilles tendon ruptures reported a mean (min-max) postoperative ATRS of 73 (14–100).

Conclusion

Missing an Achilles tendon rupture will entail higher health-care costs compared with acute ruptures. Health-care resources can be saved if Achilles tendon ruptures are detected at an early stage.