Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34089355›Full record

ArticleInternational orthopaedics2021

Management of chronic Achilles ruptures: a scoping review.

Zaki Arshad, Edward Jun Shing Lau, Shu Hui Leow, Maneesh Bhatia

Abstract readScoping Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in International orthopaedics, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

18 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Advances in Regenerative Sports Medicine Research.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2022
    Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Zaki ArshadSchool of Clinical Medicine, University of Cambridge, Cambridge Biomedical Campus, Box 111, Cambridge, CB2 0SP, UK. mza26@cam.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0002-2143-7792
Edward Jun Shing LauSchool of Clinical Medicine, University of Cambridge, Cambridge Biomedical Campus, Box 111, Cambridge, CB2 0SP, UK.
Shu Hui LeowSchool of Clinical Medicine, University of Cambridge, Cambridge Biomedical Campus, Box 111, Cambridge, CB2 0SP, UK.
Maneesh BhatiaDepartment of Trauma and Orthopaedic Surgery, University Hospitals Leicester NHS Trust, University Hospitals of Leicester Headquarters, Balmoral Building, Level 3, Leicester, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThis scoping review aims to systematically map and summarise the available evidence on the management of chronic Achilles ruptures, whilst identifying prognostic factors and areas of future research.

methodsA scoping review was performed according to the frameworks of Arksey and O'Malley, Levac and Peters. A computer-based search was performed in PubMed, Embase, EmCare, CINAHL, ISI Web of Science and Scopus, for articles reporting treatment of chronic Achilles ruptures. Two reviewers independently performed title/abstract and full text screening according to pre-defined selection criteria.

resultsA total of 747 unique articles were identified, of which 73 (9.8%) met all inclusion criteria. A variety of methods are described, with flexor hallucis longus tendon transfer being the most common. The most commonly reported outcome is the American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS) score, although 16 other measures were reported in the literatures. All studies comparing pre- and post-operative outcomes reported significant post-treatment improvement. Complications were reported in 50 studies, with an overall pooled complication rate of 168/1065 (15.8%).

conclusionAlthough beneficial results were reported following a variety of techniques, comparison between these is challenging due to the low-level study designs used and confounding factors such as treatment delay and tendon gap size. Further research comparing the efficacy of different techniques is required in order to facilitate the development of an evidence-based treatment protocol. Such work would allow clinicians to better understand the suitability of the large variety of reported techniques and select the optimal strategy for each individual patient.

Indexed as

Achilles TendonChronic DiseaseHumansRuptureTendon TransferTreatment OutcomeAchillesAchilles tendon ruptureChronic ruptureNeglected ruptureScoping review

Identifiers

PMID34089355
PMCPMC8514369

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.