ArticleOrthopedic reviews2025
Conservative treatment of achilles tendon rupture: a systematic review comparative with surgical treatment.
Article in Orthopedic reviews, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Achilles tendon ruptures are common, particularly in active individuals, and significantly affect function. Controversy persists over whether conservative or surgical treatment offers superior outcomes. Objective: To compare conservative and surgical treatments for Achilles tendon rupture regarding rerupture rates, functional recovery, and complication incidence. Methods: A systematic review was conducted following PRISMA guidelines. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing conservative and surgical treatments published between 2015 and 2025 were selected using MEDLINE. Risk of bias was assessed using Cochrane RoB 2.0. Results: Eight RCTs were included. Conservative treatment showed a higher rerupture rate but fewer complications. Surgical treatment, while reducing rerupture, increased risks of nerve injuries and infections. Long-term functional outcomes were generally comparable between groups. Conclusion: Neither approach proved universally superior. Surgical repair may be preferred to prevent rerupture, but conservative treatment avoids operative complications. Clinical decisions should consider individual factors such as age, activity level, and patient preferences.
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.