000			03482nam a22004937a 4500
008			240807s20242024 xxu||||| |||| 00| 0 eng d
022			_a2666-061X
024			_aPMC11240046 [pmc]
024			_aS2666-061X(24)00042-7 [pii]
040			_aOvid MEDLINE(R)
099			_a39006797
245			_aOpen and Percutaneous Approaches Have Similar Biomechanical Results for Primary Midsubstance Achilles Tendon Repair: A Meta-analysis.
251			_aArthroscopy, Sports Medicine, and Rehabilitation. 6(3):100924, 2024 Jun.
252			_aArthrosc Sports Med Rehabil. 6(3):100924, 2024 Jun.
253			_aArthroscopy, sports medicine, and rehabilitation
260			_c2024
260			_fFY2025
260			_p2024 Jun
265			_sepublish
265			_tPubMed-not-MEDLINE
266			_d2024-08-07
266			_z2024/07/15 05:35
520			_aClinical Relevance: In clinical studies, similar rerupture rates have been observed after open or percutaneous Achilles tendon repair. It may be beneficial for surgeons to understand whether biomechanical differences exist between these repair techniques. Copyright © 2024 The Authors.
520			_aConclusions: The results of this study suggest that both open and percutaneous techniques are biomechanically viable approaches for primary midsubstance Achilles tendon repair.
520			_aMethods: A systematic review of original research articles was performed using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. To qualify for study inclusion, articles were required to be published in English, use a laboratory design using either human or animal tissue, and directly compare the biomechanical properties of open Achilles repair using a Krackow or Kessler technique with percutaneous repair using either a locking or nonlocking suture construct. The biomechanical outcomes evaluated were displacement (millimeters) and load to failure (Newtons).
520			_aPurpose: To evaluate the biomechanical properties of open versus percutaneous Achilles tendon repair.
520			_aResults: Twelve studies met inclusion criteria, including 234 specimens (open: 97, percutaneous locking: 73; percutaneous nonlocking: 64) that underwent primary midsubstance Achilles tendon repair. Pooled analysis demonstrated no statistically significant difference in displacement (P = .240) or load to failure (P = .912) between the open and percutaneous techniques. Among the percutaneous approaches, there was no difference in displacement (P = .109) between the locking and nonlocking tendon repair systems.
546			_aEnglish
650			_zAutomated
651			_aMedStar Union Memorial Hospital
656			_aFoot and Ankle Surgery Fellowship
656			_aOrthopaedic Surgery Residency
657			_aJournal Article
700			_aGould, Heath
700			_aGuyton, Gregory _bMUMH
700			_aHembree, Walter
700			_aImbergamo, Casey _bMUMH _cOrthopaedic Surgery Residency _dMD
700			_aSequeira, Sean _bMUMH _cOrthopaedic Surgery Residency _dMD
700			_aTarapore, Rae _bMUMH _cOrthopaedic Surgery Residency _dMD
700			_aTarka, Mitchell _bMUMH _cFoot and Ankle Surgery Fellowship _dMD
790			_aLawson J, Tarapore R, Sequeira S, Imbergamo C, Tarka M, Guyton G, Hembree W, Gould H
856			_uhttps://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.asmr.2024.100924 _zhttps://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.asmr.2024.100924
942			_cART _dArticleKW - _z _Orthopaedic Institute
999			_c14454 _d14454