SynthesisArchives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery2024
Paratenon preserving repair of the midsubstance acute Achilles tendon rupture: a systematic review and meta-analysis with best- and worst-case analyses for rerupture rates.
Synthesis in Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery, 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.
- Concerns regarding Palee et al. and reasserting the underlying mechanism of action in percutaneous tenotomy.Interventional pain medicine · 2025Article
- [An update on Achilles tendon ruptures].Orthopadie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionParatenon preserving techniques to facilitate acute Achilles tendon rupture repair (AATR) functions by maintaining vascularity and biology for optimal healing response. Therefore, the purpose is to evaluate the outcomes following paratenon preserving repair of the midsubstance AATR. The hypothesis was that paratenon-preserving techniques demonstrate high return to play rates and low complication rates for the repair of the midsubstance AATR. MATERIALS AND
methodsA systematic review of the PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library databases was performed by two authors using specific search terms and eligibility criteria. The assessment of the evidence was two-fold: level and quality of evidence. A meta-analysis of proportions for the various complication rates was performed using the restricted maximum likelihood method following the Freeman-Tukey double-arcsine transformation. Fixed effects models were employed if I
resultsThe pooled return to play rate was 90.3%. The pooled rerupture rate as reported was 0.9% (best-case scenario 0.8% and worst-case scenario 6.8%). No meaningful subgroup analysis for rerupture rates could be performed based on the meta-regression. The pooled complication rate other than reruptures was 4.8%. The pooled infection rates were 0.3%, DVT rates were 1.6%, and sural nerve injury rates were 0.3%.
conclusionsParatenon preserving techniques that are minimally invasive in nature demonstrated safe and favorable outcomes with high return to play rates and low complication rates for the repair of the midsubstance AATR.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39153101What 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.