Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37178229›Full record

ArticleInternational orthopaedics2023

Re-ruptures and early outcomes after surgical repair of acute Achilles tendon ruptures: prospective, comparative multicenter study.

E Laboute, P Thoreux, J Beldame, A Caubere, J C Giunta, R Coursier, M Saab

Abstract readMulticenter Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in International orthopaedics, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.4field-weighted citation impact, top 12% of its field
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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

7 authors at 6 institutions in 1 country.

E LabouteDirecteur scientifique Société Française de Traumatologie du Sport (SFTS), C.E.R.S. Groupe Ramsay Santé, 83 av Maréchal de Lattre de Tassigny, 40130, Capbreton, France. e.laboute@ramsaygds.fr.
P ThoreuxHôpital Hôtel Dieu-APHP, Université Sorbonne Paris Nord, 1 place du Parvis Notre -Dame, 75004, Paris, France.
J BeldameInstitut de la Cheville et du Pied, Clinique Blomet, 136 rue Blomet, 75015, Paris, France.
A CaubereService de Chirurgie Orthopédique et Traumatologie, Hôpital d'Instruction des Armées Sainte-Anne, 2, Bd Sainte Anne, 83800, Toulon, France.
J C GiuntaClinique du Parc Lyon, 155 Boulevard de Stalingrad, 69006, Lyon, France.
R CoursierGHICL Hôpital Saint Vincent, 51 Boulevard de Belfort, 59462, Lille, France.
M SaabCHU Lille, Service d'Orthopedie-Traumatologie, F-59000, Lille, France.
Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Lille · FRCommunauté urbaine de Lyon · FRGroupe Hospitalier de l'Institut Catholique de Lille · FRHôpital d'Instruction des Armées Sainte-Anne · FRInstitut de la Main · FRUniversité Sorbonne Paris Nord · FR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThe primary objective of this study was to compare the re-rupture rate, clinical results, and functional outcomes six months after the surgical repair of an acute Achilles tendon rupture between three different techniques (open repair, percutaneous repair with the Tenolig®, and minimally invasive repair).

methodsA prospective, comparative, multicenter, non-randomized study was performed and included 111 patients who had an acute ruptured Achilles tendon: 74 underwent an open repair, 22 underwent a percutaneous repair using the Tenolig® and 15 had a minimally invasive repair. At six months follow-up we analyzed the number of re-ruptures, phlebitis, infections, complex regional pain syndrome, clinical outcomes (muscle atrophy, ankle dorsal flexion), functional scores (ATRS, VISA-A, EFAS, SF-12), and return to running.

resultsThere were more re-ruptures (p=0.0001) after repair with the Tenolig® (27%) than with open repairs (1.3%) and minimally invasive repairs (0%). The rate of other complications was not different. No clinical differences were found between the three groups. Only some functional scores EFAS Total (p=0.006), and VISA-A (p=0.015) were worse in the Tenolig® group. All the other results were similar between the three groups.

conclusionDespite heterogeneous studies in literature, the results of this comparative and prospective study between three surgical techniques of Achilles tendon repair confirmed that Tenolig® repair increased the rate of early re-rupture compared to open or minimally invasive techniques.

Indexed as

Achilles TendonAnkle InjuriesOrthopedic ProceduresTendon InjuriesAcute DiseaseHumansProspective StudiesRuptureTreatment OutcomeAchilles tendon ruptureearly outcomesminimally invasive surgeryopen repairTenolig®

Identifiers

PMID37178229
OpenAlexW4376505274

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.