ArticleArthroscopy, sports medicine, and rehabilitation2024
Open and Percutaneous Approaches Have Similar Biomechanical Results for Primary Midsubstance Achilles Tendon Repair: A Meta-analysis.
Article in Arthroscopy, sports medicine, and rehabilitation, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Surgical Treatment of Anchor-induced Heel Pain after Minimally Invasive Repair of Acute Achilles Tendon Rupture Using Percutaneous Achilles Repair System Achilles Midsubstance SpeedBridge™ Repair: A Case Report.Journal of orthopaedic case reports · 2026Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: To evaluate the biomechanical properties of open versus percutaneous Achilles tendon repair. Methods: A systematic review of original research articles was performed using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. To qualify for study inclusion, articles were required to be published in English, use a laboratory design using either human or animal tissue, and directly compare the biomechanical properties of open Achilles repair using a Krackow or Kessler technique with percutaneous repair using either a locking or nonlocking suture construct. The biomechanical outcomes evaluated were displacement (millimeters) and load to failure (Newtons). Results: Twelve studies met inclusion criteria, including 234 specimens (open: 97, percutaneous locking: 73; percutaneous nonlocking: 64) that underwent primary midsubstance Achilles tendon repair. Pooled analysis demonstrated no statistically significant difference in displacement ( Conclusions: The results of this study suggest that both open and percutaneous techniques are biomechanically viable approaches for primary midsubstance Achilles tendon repair. Clinical Relevance: In clinical studies, similar rerupture rates have been observed after open or percutaneous Achilles tendon repair. It may be beneficial for surgeons to understand whether biomechanical differences exist between these repair techniques.
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.