Vol. 2, Issue 4 (2016)

Evaluation of clinical & functional outcome of modified percutaneous repair of Acute Tendo Achilles Rupture using SS wire

Author(s):

Siddhartha Sagar, Sachin Yadav and Manish Shukla

Abstract:
Aims and objective
1. To evaluate the results 2 year after the management of Achilles tendon rupture, using standardized, validated assessment methods for symptoms and function in patients treated with percutaneous surgical repair augmented with ss wire.
2. To evaluate the recovery of function 2 year after injury and to study how function relates to patient-reported outcomes, with regard to lower limb function, as well as general health and quality of life.
Material and method: This was an Prospective Cohort study of 50 patients of acute ruptured Tendo Achilles who were treated with percutaneous repair. Cases were taken up according to inclusion and exclusion criteria. All patients underwent a rehabilitation program. Cases were followed and evaluated at 3 weeks, 6 weeks, 12 weeks, 6 month and 1 year interval. The results were evaluated clinically and functionally by Leppilahti scoring method.
Results: All the patients were followed up at 3 weeks, 6 weeks, 12 weeks, 6 months and 1 year interval. Mean time to return to work was 4 months in patients treated with percutaneous repair of acute ruptured Tendo Achilles. Lippelahti scores was excellent in 92%, good in 6%and fair in 2%.
Conclusion: the results of our study shows that complications associated with Percutaneous repair with modification included in this study of Tendo Achilles were significantly low with. Percutaneous repair provides excellent function, with a better cosmetic appearance, a lower rate of wound complications, re rupture rate and is also cost effective.

Pages: 200-205  |  2139 Views  176 Downloads

How to cite this article:
Siddhartha Sagar, Sachin Yadav and Manish Shukla. Evaluation of clinical & functional outcome of modified percutaneous repair of Acute Tendo Achilles Rupture using SS wire. Int. J. Orthop. Sci. 2016;2(4):200-205. DOI: 10.22271/ortho.2016.v2.i4d.31