ArticleIndian journal of orthopaedics2023
Functional Outcome in Percutaneous Achilles Tendon Repair.
Article in Indian journal of orthopaedics, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Surgical management of chronic Achilles tendon rupture: evidence-based guidelines.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2024Pooled it
- All-inside endoscopic and minimally invasive modified Bunnell suture yield favourable outcomes in acute midsubstance Achilles tendon ruptures: a comparative study.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2026Article
- Long-term functional outcomes of augmented primary repair using the peroneus brevis tendon for traumatic Achilles tendon ruptures: a retrospective cohort study.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2026Article
- Percutaneous Achilles Repair With High-Strength Suture Tape Augmentation: A Technical Note.Arthroscopy techniques · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Rupture of the Achilles tendon is a considerable cause of morbidity with reduced function following injury. Randomized studies have so far failed to show a difference in outcome between operative and nonoperative management of Achilles tendon rupture, provided that no re-rupture occurs. Percutaneous Achilles repair has been suggested to result in superior patient satisfaction compared with open repair in patients with an acute Achilles tendon rupture. Aim and Objectives: To assess and evaluate the functional outcome after percutaneous repair in patients of the acute and closed Achilles tendon ruptures. Materials and Methods: It was a prospective study conducted on patients diagnosed as having rupture of the Achilles tendon. A total of 25 patients with mean age of 44.4 (range 19-65) years were taken, who underwent percutaneous Achilles tendon repair. Results: The number of patients who reported excellent or good scores (ATRS > 80) at 3, 6 and 12 months were 0%, 16% and 100%, respectively. The mean AOFAS hind foot score at 3-, 6- and 12-month follow-ups was 77.9 ± 4.3, 92.04 ± 2.4 and 96.16.32 ± 1.1, respectively. The number of patients who reported excellent or good scores (AOFAS > 74) at 3, 6 and 12 months were 76%, 100% and 100%, respectively. Most of the patients in our study showed no complications, and only 2 (8%) of patients had the features of sural nerve injury which was resolved in the subsequent follow-ups. Conclusion: Percutaneous repair of the Achilles tendon is an effective procedure which gives excellent functional outcome with very few complications. The percutaneous technique gives an additional advantage of less operative time, no wound complications, less damage to the soft tissues, and improved cosmesis as compared to the open repair.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.