Related Experiment Video
Updated: May 6, 2026
Author Spotlight: Unraveling the Mechanobiology of Tendon Impingement – A Multiaxial Murine Hind Limb Explant Model
Published on: December 8, 2023
Percutaneous versus open repair of acute Achilles tendon ruptures
Panagiotis K Karabinas1, Ioannis S Benetos, Kalliopi Lampropoulou-Adamidou
1Third Department of Orthopaedics, Athens University Medical School, Athens, Greece.
Background:
Controversy exists regarding the optimal treatment for acute Achilles tendon ruptures. Conservative and surgical treatments have been reported with variable results and complications rates. The purpose of this study is to compare the postoperative clinical and functional results of percutaneous versus open repair of acute Achilles tendon ruptures.
Materials And Methods:
We present 34 patients with acute Achilles tendon ruptures treated with open and percutaneous surgical repair. There were 15 patients who had open surgical repair and 19 patients who had percutaneous repair. The mean follow-up was 22 months (range 10-24 months) for the open repair group and 20 months (range 9-24 months) for the percutaneous repair group; no patient was lost to follow-up. Postoperative rehabilitation was the same for both groups. Wound healing, complications, ankle range of motion, and patients' return to work, activity level, weight-bearing, and subjective assessment of their treatment were recorded.
Results:
No significant difference was observed with respect to any of the examined variables between the open and percutaneous repair groups. Tendon healing was observed in all patients of both groups by 7-9 weeks. The mean time of patients' return to work was 7 weeks for the open repair group and 9 weeks for the percutaneous repair group. All patients were capable of full weight bearing by the 8th postoperative week time; the time to return to previous activities including non-contact sports was 5 months for both groups. All patients expressed satisfaction and graded their treatment as good. As expected, cosmetic appearance was significantly better in the percutaneous repair group. One patient who had open repair experienced skin incision pain and dysesthesia and graded his operation as fair. No patient experienced other complications such as re-rupture, infection, sural neuroma, or Achilles tendinitis within the period of this study.
Conclusions:
The present study showed similarly successful clinical and functional results after both open and percutaneous repair of acute Achilles tendon ruptures are similar. Cosmetic appearance is superior in the group of patients who had a percutaneous treatment.
