AJSM signin
HOME HELP CONTACT US SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
First published on September 20, 2007, doi:10.1177/0363546507307503
This version was published on December 1, 2007
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
35/12/2033    most recent
0363546507307503v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Twaddle, B. C.
Right arrow Articles by Poon, P.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Twaddle, B. C.
Right arrow Articles by Poon, P.
Related Collections
Right arrow Achilles tendon
Right arrow Rehabilitation/Training
Right arrow Nonoperative
Right arrow Operative
The American Journal of Sports Medicine 35:2033-2038 (2007)
© 2007 American Orthopaedic Society for Sports Medicine

Early Motion for Achilles Tendon Ruptures: Is Surgery Important?

A Randomized, Prospective Study

Bruce C. Twaddle, FRACS{dagger},* and Peter Poon, FRACS{ddagger}

From the {dagger} Department of Orthopaedics, Auckland City Hospital, Auckland, New Zealand, and {ddagger} North Shore Hospital, Takapuna, Auckland, New Zealand

* Address correspondence to Bruce C. Twaddle, FRACS, Department of Orthopaedics, Auckland City Hospital, Private Bag 92-024, Auckland 1, New Zealand (e-mail: brucet{at}adhb.govt.nz).

Background: Comparisons of surgically and nonsurgically treated Achilles tendon ruptures have demonstrated that those treated with surgery allow earlier motion and tend to show superior results. However, early motion enhances tendon healing with or without surgery and may be the important factor in optimizing outcomes in patients with Achilles tendon rupture.

Hypothesis: There is no difference in the outcome of acute Achilles tendon rupture treated nonoperatively or operatively if controlled early motion is allowed as part of the rehabilitation program.

Study Design: Randomized, controlled clinical trial; Level of evidence, 1.

Methods: Patients with acute rupture of the Achilles tendon were randomized to surgery or no surgery, with both groups receiving early motion controlled in a removable orthosis, progressing to full weightbearing at 8 weeks from treatment. Both groups were followed prospectively for 12 months with measurements of range of motion, calf circumference, and the Musculoskeletal Functional Assessment Instrument (MFAI) outcome score; any reruptures and any complications were noted.

Results: Both groups were comparable for age and sex. There were no significant differences between the 2 groups in plantar flexion, dorsiflexion, calf circumference, or the MFAI scores measured at 2, 8, 12, 26, or 52 weeks. One patient in each group was noncompliant and required surgical rerepair of the tendon. There were no differences in complications and a similar low number of reruptures in both groups.

Conclusion: This study supports early motion as an acceptable form of rehabilitation in both surgically and nonsurgically treated patients with comparable functional results and a low rerupture rate. There appears to be no difference between the 2 groups, suggesting that controlled early motion is the important part of treatment of ruptured Achilles tendon.

Key Words: Achilles tendon rupture • surgical treatment • rehabilitation • nonsurgical management






HOME HELP CONTACT US SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 2007 by the American Orthopaedic Society for Sports Medicine.