You are here

Article Text

Article menu

Download PDFPDF

Review
Return to play post-Achilles tendon rupture: a systematic review and meta-analysis of rate and measures of return to play
  1. Jennifer A Zellers1,
  2. Michael R Carmont2,3,
  3. Karin Grävare Silbernagel3,4
  1. 1Program in Biomechanics and Movement Science, University of Delaware, Newark, Delaware, USA
  2. 2Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, The Princess Royal Hospital, Telford, Shropshire, UK
  3. 3Institute of Clinical Sciences, Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden
  4. 4Department of Physical Therapy, University of Delaware, Newark, Delaware, USA
  1. Correspondence to Dr Karin Grävare Silbernagel, Department of Physical Therapy, University of Delaware, 540 South College Ave, Newark, DE 19713, USA; kgs{at}udel.edu

Abstract

Aim This systematic review and meta-analysis sought to identify return to play (RTP) rates following Achilles tendon rupture and evaluate what measures are used to determine RTP.

Design A systematic review and meta-analysis were performed. Studies were assessed for risk of bias and grouped based on repeatability of their measure of RTP determination.

Data sources PubMed, CINAHL, Web of Science and Scopus databases were searched to identify potentially relevant articles.

Eligibility criteria for selecting studies Studies reporting RTP/sport/sport activity in acute, closed Achilles tendon rupture were included.

Results 108 studies encompassing 6506 patients were included for review. 85 studies included a measure for determining RTP. The rate of RTP in all studies was 80% (95% CI 75% to 85%). Studies with measures describing determination of RTP reported lower rates than studies without metrics described, with rates being significantly different between groups (p<0.001).

Conclusions 80 per cent of patients returned to play following Achilles tendon rupture; however, the RTP rates are dependent on the quality of the method used to measure RTP. To further understand RTP after Achilles tendon rupture, a standardised, reliable and valid method is required.

  • Achilles
  • Sport
  • Physical activity
  • Achilles tendon
  • Assessment

http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bjsports-2016-096106

Statistics from Altmetric.com

    Request Permissions

    If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

    Background

    A rupture of the Achilles tendon predominantly occurs in middle-aged males during sports activity,1–8 with increasing incidence rates of as much as 69 per 100 000.1 ,9 The greatest increases in incidence occur in the 40–60 and over 60 age groups.1 ,10 ,11

    Most people with an Achilles tendon rupture are recreationally competitive or involved in social sport12 ,13 at the time of injury and report a desire to return to same activity.14 The resumption of sports and physical activity is also an essential factor for the maintenance of health and prevention of morbidities following injury.15 Despite this goal, there are reports that only half of patients return to play 1 year after injury.14 ,16

    There have been a variety of proposed reasons that may contribute to why not all patients are able to return to play. Rupture of the Achilles tendon leads to muscle weakness17 and decreased endurance,18 which persists to 10 years following injury.19–22 Performance of higher level activities, such as those required for return to play (RTP), also demonstrate large variations between individuals.17 In a study by Olsson et al,17 limb symmetry indexes between injured and non-injured sides ranged from 84% to 102% with SDs ranging from 15% to 26% during two jumping tasks. This variability may be due to any number of factors: gender, method of management, plyometric strength deficits, psychological components and other physical changes indirectly related to injury and recovery course.4 ,23–25 Patients may be physically able to return to sports activities,26 but the fear of re-rupture may cause an individual to avoid the sports activity during which injury occurred.14 Patients may also develop additional musculoskeletal problems related to changes in gait biomechanics27–29 such as knee injury or contralateral Achilles tendinopathy (25%) and rupture (6%).30

    To appreciate the impact of Achilles tendon rupture on the ability for an individual to RTP, it is important to understand what the RTP rates are following injury and how RTP is currently evaluated. This will allow for standardised evaluation of RTP across studies, providing a solid basis for comparisons. Standardised evaluation can enable larger, combined cohorts more generaliseable to the larger population, which will help inform treatment and rehabilitative guidelines.

    The aim of this study was to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of RTP rates following Achilles tendon rupture and evaluate what measures are used to evaluate RTP.

    Methods

    Search strategy

    Potentially relevant articles were identified via a search of PubMed, CINAHL, Web of Science and Scopus databases. Search terms included two strings linked by an AND modifier. The first search string included (Achilles tendon AND injur*) OR (Achilles tendon AND rupture). The second string was designated as (Recovery of function OR performance outcome* OR athletic performance* OR treatment outcome*). The terms tendinopathy and review were linked with NOT modifiers. Results were filtered to English language, human studies and adults. Databases were searched on 1 March 2016 with no restriction of time frame. Results of the database search were exported to a reference management database for review. Preliminary searches included terms such as ‘return to play’ and ‘return to sport’; however, these searches yielded less studies, and studies known to the authors as reporting RTP following Achilles tendon rupture were missing. Therefore, the more general, inclusive terminology was used. Articles were identified through electronic database searching; no hand searching, citation tracking or reference scanning was performed. The initial search and search strategy was performed by a reference librarian with input from the authors.

    Selection criteria

    To be included, articles needed to describe patients with closed, acute Achilles tendon rupture and be of randomised control trial, cohort study or case series study design. Because of the demographics of typical patients with Achilles tendon rupture, inclusion was limited to adults (at least age 18). Finally, an outcome measure regarding return to activity, sport or play needed to be included within the abstract or body of the article. Articles were excluded based on the following criteria: case studies, chronic/delayed treatment (>4 weeks), open rupture/tendon laceration, inclusion of only patients with Achilles tendon re-rupture, non-English articles, non-human studies and bilateral ruptures. Studies including cohorts of included and excluded populations (eg, a study comparing outcomes in a cohort of acute Achilles tendon rupture vs chronic Achilles tendon rupture) were included, but only data meeting inclusion for the review were included in the data analysis (ie, acute Achilles tendon rupture).

    To ensure that each study met the inclusion criteria, studies were reviewed first by title. Title review primarily excluded articles not relating to Achilles tendon rupture, basic science studies not relevant to the purpose of this study or studies pertaining to chronic rupture. Articles were then reviewed by abstract, followed by a full text review to ensure that the study included RTP outcomes either in the abstract or full text. All articles were reviewed by title and abstract by two independent reviewers to determine if the study met selection criteria. If consensus was unable to be reached, a third reviewer was consulted. For full text review, two independent reviewers each independently reviewed 25% of studies. Reviewers were consistently able to agree on inclusion of studies, and, therefore, the remaining studies were divided between the two reviewers owing to the volume of studies identified and time constraints. If there were any studies that did not clearly meet selection criteria, this study was brought to the attention of the second reviewer to ensure consensus in the studies included in the review. If consensus was unable to be reached, a third reviewer was consulted.

    Risk of bias

    All articles included for full text review were scored for risk of bias using the scoring system described by Ardern et al.31 This scoring system comprises six criteria, and the number of criteria fulfilled have been determined for each study. To fulfil all six criteria, the study must include selection criteria for patient inclusion/exclusion, report patient demographic data, report results of a representative population, report patients' preinjury level, compare patients' postintervention/postinjury sports level to their preinjury level and be of prospective study design. Studies were rated for risk of bias by two reviewers.

    Data extraction and synthesis

    Data were extracted from each included study by two reviewers. The following data were extracted: number of patients, patient demographics (age, sex), study design, percentage of patients returning to sport, measures of performance used, time frame to return to sport (with measure of variance) and time of evaluation of RTP. In studies that reported RTP percentages at multiple time points, data from the final study time point were used in our analysis. In retrospective studies where a mean follow-up time was reported, this value was used for time of evaluation of RTP. Studies that included measures of sport/activity performance but did not report a RTP percentage were included in the demographics analysis but were not included in the RTP rate meta-analysis.

    When there is no definition of the measurement method, the risk of bias is considered very high, therefore, we also assessed the RTP-rated methodology of each study. Studies were classified into one of two groups. Group 1 included studies in which the measure could be implied based on how return to activity/sport was reported or the measure of RTP was clearly described in the study's methods (eg, studies that specified patients had returned to play at the same level as prior to injury or provided exact wording of interview/survey questions to patients or subscales of questionnaires specific to return to sport). Group 2 studies included those that reported a RTP percentage or time frame in the results, but the measure to determine RTP was not described and unable to be inferred based on the phrasing of the results (eg, studies that included a statement in the results such as ‘X% of patients returned to sport’). Two reviewers grouped studies into methodology classifications. Initially, two reviewers independently reviewed a subset of articles to check agreement. Then, remaining articles were divided between reviewers and reviewed by a single reviewer. If grouping classification was unclear, the second reviewer was requested to provide a classification rating. If consensus was not achieved, a third reviewer was consulted.

    Statistical analysis

    Means and SDs were calculated for demographic data. Pooled proportion of RTP rate, 95% CIs and I2 index (a measure of heterogeneity)32 were calculated for the total group and for the two RTP methodology subgroup classifications using StatsDirect Statistical Software (StatsDirect, England). A one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) test was used to determine whether there were differences in RTP rates between the two RTP methodology subgroups. Pearson correlations were conducted to identify relationships between the RTP rate with the year of study and the time of RTP evaluation. ANOVA and correlations were done using SPSS V.23 (IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows, Armonk, New York, USA: IBM Corp). Weighted mean (weighted by number of patients) and SD were calculated for time to RTP means across all studies reporting a time to RTP mean with measure of variance.

    Results

    Search results and description of studies

    The database searches yielded 552 articles. A total of 322 articles were excluded based on title. Of the 230 articles reviewed by abstract, 199 articles were included for full text review. Of those, a total of 108 articles met the inclusion criteria (figure 1 and table 1).

    View this table:
    Table 1

    Description of included studies

    Figure 1
    Figure 1

    Decision tree for inclusion/exclusion of studies.

    Of the 108 studies, 71 reported selection criteria, 106 reported patient demographic data, 24 reported patient preinjury level of play, 82 compared postintervention/postinjury sports outcome to preinjury level and 57 were prospective in design. The mode qualitative assessment score of all included articles was four criteria fulfilled. There was no difference in mode of criteria fulfilled on qualitative assessment between methodology subgroups.

    Patients were a mean (SD) of 41.4 (6.8) years of age, and 79.6% of patients were male. Six studies did not report patient sex,38 ,61 ,75 ,85 ,102 ,126 and five studies did not report patient age.45 ,62 ,73 ,75 ,80 Eighty-five of the studies reported RTP measure (RTP methodology subgroup 1) and 23 were classified as lacking RTP measure (methodology subgroup 2). There were 6506 patients included in all studies—5535 in subgroup 1 and 971 in subgroup 2.

    Rate of RTP

    The pooled rate of RTP (based on 98 studies) was 80% (95% CI 75% to 85%, I2=95.8%) (figure 2). Three studies81 ,95 ,121 did not report a RTP percentage but reported RTP time frames. These studies were included in the analysis for subject demographics and time frame to RTP. In methodology subgroup 1 studies, the rate of RTP was 77% (95% CI 70% to 83%) (figure 2). In methodology subgroup 2 studies, the rate of RTP was 91% (95% CI 84% to 96%) (figure 3). Lower RTP rates were significantly lower in subgroup 1 versus subgroup 2 studies (p<0.001). There was no relationship between RTP rate and year of study publication (Pearson r=−0.030, p=0.765).

    Figure 2
    Figure 2

    Rate of return to play (RTP) in group 1 studies reporting per cent RTP. Error bars indicate 95% CIs, and square markers indicate proportion of patients able to return to play reported in each study. The diamond marker and vertical line indicate the proportion of patients able to return to play in all group 1 studies combined.

    Figure 3
    Figure 3

    Rate of return to play (RTP) in group 2 studies reporting per cent RTP. Error bars indicate 95% CIs, and square markers indicate proportion of patients able to return to play reported in each study. The diamond marker and vertical line indicate the proportion of patients able to return to play in all group 2 studies combined.

    Relationship between RTP and time of evaluation

    The time of evaluation of RTP varied between 5 and 145.2 months (mean=23.8 months, SD=22.9 months). There was no relationship between time of evaluation and RTP rate (Pearson r=−0.026, p=0.803).

    Time to RTP

    The mean (SD) time to RTP (based on 37 studies) with a measure of variance was 6.0 (1.8) months (figure 4).

    Figure 4
    Figure 4

    Time to return to play (RTP). Forest plot of time to return to play in months. Error bars indicate range as that was the most commonly reported measure of variance. Six studies reported a range without a mean and appeared with only bars indicating reported range. The vertical line indicates the group mean for all studies reporting mean with measure of variance for time to return to play. Group 1 studies are indicated with squares for means, and group 2 studies are indicated with circles for means. Studies are ordered by the RTP methodology group, then by number of patients with studies larger number of patients higher on the y-axis.

    Discussion

    The results of this systematic review indicate that 80% of patients with Achilles tendon rupture will RTP; however, determination of the rate of RTP is subject to bias and dependent on the measure used to evaluate RTP. In the process of identifying how different studies evaluated RTP, we found that numerous studies report a rate of RTP without including how this rate was measured. While the rate of RTP for studies describing RTP measures fell 3% below the rate for all included studies, the rate of RTP for studies without described RTP measures (and higher risk of bias) was 11% higher than the rate for all included studies (see online supplementary figure S1).

    In general, while there is good consensus that RTP is a goal in this population, the literature regarding the resumption of sports activity to preinjury levels following Achilles tendon rupture is limited. RTP is reported as an outcome in a minority (19.7%) of studies on recovery of function following Achilles tendon rupture, and a smaller number, 15.4% of 552 articles, report RTP with indication of what measure was used to gauge RTP. For the individual patient, RTP is often a primary goal and is an important component of success of treatment following Achilles tendon rupture. This points to the need for better, standardised measures for gauging RTP that encompass the multiple aspects that comprise an individual's ability to RTP.

    Measures to assess RTP range from patient interview to the use of sports participation scores to objective sports performance indicators.41 ,120 The measures used to assess RTP performance address multiple aspects of play, including volume/frequency of play, type of sport/sport demands, level of play and play performance. Considering these aspects will be important in developing comprehensive measures that seek to capture RTP as a multifaceted concern.

    Rate of RTP

    There were large variations on RTP rates and time frames among the included studies. While the results indicate that 80% of subjects were able to return to play, studies reported as few as 18.6% and as large as 100% RTP rates. In studies of patients with ACL reconstruction, increasing stringency of RTP definition results in lower percentages of athletes who return to play.31 ,148 Therefore, the more conservative estimate of 77% provided by the methodology subgroup 1 studies in our review might be a more accurate (although likely still optimistic) estimate of true RTP rates.

    There was no relationship between time of evaluation of RTP and RTP rate. This suggests that, while there was variability in time of evaluation, the majority of studies were of long enough duration to capture RTP outcomes.

    Time to RTP

    The average time to RTP was 6.0 months, but this also varied with study means/medians as low as 2.95 months and as high as 10.4 months. This estimate seems to coincide with timing of functional capacity recovery postrupture, which has been reported to recover rapidly 3 and 12 months,69 ,83 ,116 ,149 ,150 followed by slowed rates of change between 1 and 2 years postrupture.17 Prior studies evaluating the return of functional capacity following Achilles tendon rupture have reported large variations between individuals.151 ,152 Some of the variation seen in this analysis may be due to those individual variations. Additionally, differences in study design and definition of RTP may contribute to the variance in reported time of RTP. In the future, consistency and standardisation of RTP evaluation will assist in establishing RTP time frames that allow for improved comparison of multiple cohorts across studies.

    Other functional and performance measures

    There are a variety of functional and performance measures that have been used in the study of patients with Achilles tendon rupture. These measures present challenges when measuring RTP, however. On the one hand, there are a variety of validated, reliable questionnaires that assess different aspects of RTP that have been developed for use in non-Achilles tendon rupture populations. For instance, the PAS90 includes measures of activity intensity and duration. The Halasi Score,147 an adaptation of the Tegner Score,48 captures factors such as type and level of sport activity. The FAOS59 and FAAM33 have a sport-specific scale, which captures perceived difficulty with sport-related manoeuvres. While these scores capture certain components of the whole RTP picture, the difficulty with using these scores is that they were not developed specifically for use in this unique population and many have not been validated in the Achilles tendon rupture population. They may or may not capture the unique needs of this specific population. On the other hand, there are Achilles tendon rupture specific questionnaires that capture some aspects of performance but may not comprehensively capture RTP. For example, the ATRS40 is a valid, reliable, reproducible and responsive questionnaire for use in individuals following Achilles tendon rupture. While this questionnaire addresses multiple concerns reported by patients with Achilles tendon rupture, it only asks three questions regarding running, jumping and physical labour capacity, which may not adequately address the RTP question.

    Ultimately, while there are numerous questionnaires that measure various aspects of RTP, there are none that comprehensively address the needs of this specific population. Given the importance of RTP for these individuals and the need to standardise measures to evaluate RTP, it would be beneficial for a consistent set of currently available tests and measures to be defined or for a measure to be developed that emphasises volume as well as type of sport with consideration of Achilles tendon loading and touches on sport performance.

    Suggestions for clinical practice and research

    From a study design and reporting standpoint, there are ways to improve measure of RTP using the tools currently available. While a majority of studies compare postinjury to preinjury rates, this was done via patient interview or unvalidated questionnaire in the majority of studies and only 22.2% of studies report a measure for preinjury performance. Preinjury rates are often obtained at time of follow-up and rely on accurate patient recollection of activity participation status. Prospective data regarding sport performance are ideal, but not always available. It may be beneficial to have patients rate sport performance early postinjury as opposed to a follow-up several weeks to months post-injury. Another thing to consider is improving the frequency of reporting sport-specific subscales of already validated questionnaires. The AOFAS,35 FAOS59 ,153 ,154 and Thermann43 Scores include sports and activity subscales, but these subscales are infrequently reported. Finally, though all terms implying sports participation of activity were included in this systematic review, it was noted that a number of different terms were used in the literature. Activity, level, standard, performance and intensity were all used; however, these may mean that different things to patients and responses may vary accordingly. Variations in terminology further complicate search strategy when attempting to find relevant literature. On the basis of a consensus statement from 2002, the use of RTP is recommended to improve consistency in phrasing.155

    Study strengths and limitations

    This systematic review assessed studies based on two separate set of criteria. The criteria developed by Ardern et al31 was used to evaluate study risk of bias. We also developed a second set of criteria to evaluate study methodology with regard to measuring RTP based on reproducibility. The combination of methods of assessing study risk of bias and methodology allowed us to distinguish between quality in reporting between groups of studies.

    There are some limitations to our review. Included studies covered a range of research questions with a variety of set time points for follow-up and various types of treatments. Studies incorporated data from varied populations (recreational as well as professional athletes), which could impact the RTP rate and time frame. Broad study inclusion is beneficial for understanding RTP in the larger, varied population of individuals with Achilles tendon rupture. Similarly, while many terms were included in this literature search to capture the large number of different terms currently used to describe RTP, this allows for improved generalisability to this population of individuals. Exclusion criteria did eliminate studies of portions of the population of patients with Achilles tendon rupture (Achilles tendon laceration, delayed treatment), so the findings of this study may not be generalisable to these populations. Unpublished and non-English language studies were not included in this study, which introduces the possibility of publication and language bias.

    Conclusions

    Four out of five patients returned to sport after Achilles tendon rupture, at an average of 6 months following injury. Studies with well-defined RTP measures demonstrated lower RTP rates compared to studies that only reported the RTP rate with no description of how the rate was determined.

    What are the findings?

    • About 80% of people are able to RTP following Achilles tendon rupture.

    • Measures that are better described and more reproducible are associated with lower RTP rates.

    • Measures evaluating RTP are variable and inconsistently reported.

    How might it impact on clinical practice in the future?

    • Provide evidence-based RTP rate estimates for patient education.

    • Improve consistency in use and reporting of RTP measures.

    • Inform the future development of comprehensive evaluative tools to measure RTP.

    Acknowledgments

    The authors thank Sarah Katz, reference librarian, for her assistance with the literature search and Ryan Pohlig for his guidance with statistical analysis.

    References

    1. ↵
      1. Huttunen TT,
      2. Kannus P,
      3. Rolf C, et al
      . Acute Achilles tendon ruptures: incidence of injury and surgery in Sweden between 2001 and 2012. Am J Sports Med 2014;42:2419–23. doi:10.1177/0363546514540599
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    2. ↵
      1. Ahmad J,
      2. Repka M,
      3. Raikin SM
      . Treatment of myotendinous Achilles ruptures. Foot Ankle Int 2013;34:1074–8. doi:10.1177/1071100713483115
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    3. ↵
      1. Ateschrang A,
      2. Gratzer C,
      3. Weise K
      . Incidence and effect of calcifications after open-augmented Achilles tendon repair. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 2008;128:1087–92. doi:10.1007/s00402-007-0441-5
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    4. ↵
      1. Bergkvist D,
      2. Astrom I,
      3. Josefsson PO, et al
      . Acute Achilles tendon rupture: a questionnaire follow-up of 487 patients. J Bone Jt Surg Am 2012;94:1229–33. doi:10.2106/JBJS.J.01601
      OpenUrlPubMed
    5. ↵
      1. Bevoni R,
      2. Angelini A,
      3. D'Apote G, et al
      . Long term results of acute Achilles repair with triple-bundle technique and early rehabilitation protocol. Injury 2014;45:1268–74. doi:10.1016/j.injury.2014.04.028
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    6. ↵
      1. Buchgraber A,
      2. Pässler HH
      . Percutaneous repair of Achilles tendon rupture. Immobilization versus functional postoperative treatment. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1997:113–22.
    7. ↵
      1. Cretnik A,
      2. Frank A
      . Incidence and outcome of rupture of the Achilles tendon. Wien Klin Wochenschr 2004;116:33–8.
      OpenUrlPubMed
    8. ↵
      1. Gwynne-Jones DP,
      2. Sims M,
      3. Handcock D
      . Epidemiology and outcomes of acute Achilles tendon rupture with operative or nonoperative treatment using an identical functional bracing protocol. Foot Ankle Int 2011;32:337–43. doi:10.3113/FAI.2011.0337
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    9. ↵
      1. Lantto I,
      2. Heikkinen J,
      3. Flinkkila T, et al
      . Epidemiology of Achilles tendon ruptures: increasing incidence over a 33-year period. Scand J Med Sci Sport 2015;25:e133–8. doi:10.1111/sms.12253
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    10. ↵
      1. Moller A
      . Increasing incidence of Achilles tendon rupture. Acta Orthop Scand 1996;67:479–81. doi:10.3109/17453679608996672
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    11. ↵
      1. Ganestam A,
      2. Kallemose T,
      3. Troelsen A, et al
      . Increasing incidence of acute Achilles tendon rupture and a noticeable decline in surgical treatment from 1994 to 2013. A nationwide registry study of 33,160 patients. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2015. doi: 10.1007/s00167-015-3544-5doi:10.1007/s00167-015-3544-5
    12. ↵
      1. Houshian S,
      2. Tscherning T,
      3. Riegels-Nielsen P
      . The epidemiology of Achilles tendon rupture in a Danish county. Injury 1998;29:651–4. doi:10.1016/S0020-1383(98)00147-8
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    13. ↵
      1. Raikin SM,
      2. Garras DN,
      3. Krapchev PV
      . Achilles tendon injuries in a United States population. Foot Ankle Int 2013;34:475–80. doi:10.1177/1071100713477621
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    14. ↵
      1. Moller M,
      2. Movin T,
      3. Granhed H, et al
      . Acute rupture of tendon Achillis. A prospective randomised study of comparison between surgical and non-surgical treatment. J Bone Jt Surg Br 2001;83:843–8.
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    15. ↵
      1. Trost SG,
      2. Blair SN,
      3. Khan KM
      . Physical inactivity remains the greatest public health problem of the 21st century: evidence, improved methods and solutions using the ‘7 investments that work’ as a framework. Br J Sports Med 2014;48:169–70. doi:10.1136/bjsports-2013-093372
      OpenUrlFREE Full Text
    16. ↵
      1. Carmont MR,
      2. Grävare Silbernagel K,
      3. Brorsson A, et al
      . The Achilles tendon resting angle as an indirect measure of Achilles tendon length following rupture, repair, and rehabilitation. Asia-Pacific J Sport Med Arthrosc Rehabil Technol 2015;2:49–55.
      OpenUrlCrossRef
    17. ↵
      1. Olsson N,
      2. Nilsson-Helander K,
      3. Karlsson J, et al
      . Major functional deficits persist 2 years after acute Achilles tendon rupture. Knee Surg Sport Traumatol Arthrosc 2011;19:1385–93. doi:10.1007/s00167-011-1511-3
      OpenUrlCrossRef
    18. ↵
      1. Bostick GP,
      2. Jomha NM,
      3. Suchak AA, et al
      . Factors associated with calf muscle endurance recovery 1 year after achilles tendon rupture repair. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2010;40:345–51. doi:10.2519/jospt.2010.3204
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    19. ↵
      1. Horstmann T,
      2. Lukas C,
      3. Merk J, et al
      . Deficits 10-years after Achilles tendon repair. Int J Sport Med 2012;33:474–9. doi:10.1055/s-0032-1301932
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    20. ↵
      1. Lantto I,
      2. Heikkinen J,
      3. Flinkkila T, et al
      . Early functional treatment versus cast immobilization in tension after Achilles rupture repair: results of a prospective randomized trial with 10 or more years of follow-up. Am J Sports Med 2015;43:2302–9. doi:10.1177/0363546515591267
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    21. ↵
      1. Mavrodontidis A,
      2. Lykissas M,
      3. Koulouvaris P, et al
      . Percutaneous repair of acute Achilles tendon rupture: a functional evaluation study with a minimum 10-year follow-up. Acta Orthop Traumatol Turc 2015;49:661–7.
      OpenUrlPubMed
    22. ↵
      1. Heikkinen J,
      2. Lantto L,
      3. Flinkkila T, et al
      . Augmented compared with nonaugmented surgical repair after total Achilles rupture: results of a prospective randomized trial with thirteen or more years of follow-up. J Bone Jt Surg 2016;98:85–92. doi:10.2106/JBJS.O.00496
      OpenUrl
    23. ↵
      1. Gravare Silbernagel K,
      2. Brorsson A,
      3. Olsson N, et al
      . Sex differences in outcome after an acute Achilles tendon rupture. Orthop J Sport Med 2015;3:1–6. doi:10.1177/2325967115586768
      OpenUrl
    24. ↵
      1. Olsson N,
      2. Petzold M,
      3. Brorsson A, et al
      . Predictors of clinical outcome after acute Achilles tendon ruptures. Am J Sports Med 2014;42:1448–55. doi:10.1177/0363546514527409
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    25. ↵
      1. Hansen MS,
      2. Christensen M,
      3. Budolfsen T, et al
      . Achilles tendon total rupture score at 3 months can predict patients’ ability to return to sport 1 year after injury. Knee Surg Sport Traumatol Arthrosc 2016;24:1365–71. doi:10.1007/s00167-015-3974-0
      OpenUrlCrossRef
    26. ↵
      1. Metz R,
      2. van der Heijden GJ,
      3. Verleisdonk EJ, et al
      . Effect of complications after minimally invasive surgical repair of acute Achilles tendon ruptures: report on 211 cases. Am J Sports Med 2011;39:820–4. doi:10.1177/0363546510392012
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    27. ↵
      1. Grävare Silbernagel K,
      2. Willy R,
      3. Davis I
      . Pre- and post-injury running analysis along with measurements of strength and tendon length in a patient with a surgically repaired Achilles tendon rupture. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2012;42:521–9. doi:10.2519/jospt.2012.3913
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    28. ↵
      1. Follak N,
      2. Ganzer D,
      3. Merk H
      . The utility of gait analysis in the rehabilitation of patients after surgical treatment of Achilles tendon rupture. Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol 2002;12:90–5. doi:10.1007/s00590-002-0020-y
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    29. ↵
      1. Don R,
      2. Ranavolo A,
      3. Cacchio A, et al
      . Relationship between recovery of calf-muscle biomechanical properties and gait pattern following surgery for Achilles tendon rupture. Clin Biomech 2007;22:211–20. doi:10.1016/j.clinbiomech.2006.10.001
      OpenUrlCrossRef
    30. ↵
      1. Årøen A,
      2. Helgø D,
      3. Granlund OG, et al
      . Contralateral tendon rupture risk is increased in individuals with a previous Achilles tendon rupture. Scand J Med Sci Sport 2004;14:30–3. doi:10.1111/j.1600-0838.2004.00344.x
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    31. ↵
      1. Ardern CL,
      2. Webster KE,
      3. Taylor NF, et al
      . Return to sport following anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis of the state of play. Br J Sports Med 2011;45:596–606. doi:10.1136/bjsm.2010.076364
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    32. ↵
      1. Higgins J,
      2. Thompson SG,
      3. Deeks JJ, et al
      . Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses. Br Med J 2003;327:557–60.
      OpenUrlFREE Full Text
    33. ↵
      1. Martin RL,
      2. Irrgang JJ,
      3. Burdett RG, et al
      . Evidence of validity for the Foot and Ankle Ability Measure (FAAM). Foot Ankle Int 2005;26:968–83.
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
      1. Aktas S,
      2. Kocaoglu B
      . Open versus minimal invasive repair with Achillon device. Foot Ankle Int 2009;30:391–7. doi:10.3113/FAI.2009.0391
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    35. ↵
      1. SooHoo NF,
      2. Shuler M,
      3. Fleming LL
      . Evaluation of the validity of the AOFAS Clinical Rating Systems by correlation to the SF-36. Foot Ankle Int 2003;24:50–5.
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
      1. Ceccarelli F,
      2. Calderazzi F,
      3. Pedrazzi G
      . Is there a relation between AOFAS Ankle-Hindfoot Score and sf-36 in evaluation of Achilles ruptures treated by percutaneous technique? J Foot Ankle Surg 2014;53:16–21. doi:10.1053/j.jfas.2013.09.005
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
      1. Kitaoka HB,
      2. Alexander IJ,
      3. Adelaar RS, et al
      . Clinical rating systems for the ankle-hindfoot, midfoot, hallux, and lesser toes. Foot Ankle Int 1994;15:349–53. doi:10.1177/107110079401500701
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    38. ↵
      1. Aktas S,
      2. Kocaoglu B,
      3. Nalbantoglu U, et al
      . End-to-end versus augmented repair in the treatment of acute Achilles tendon ruptures. J Foot Ankle Surg 2007;46:336–40. doi:10.1053/j.jfas.2007.06.006
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
      1. Al-Mouazzen L,
      2. Rajakulendran K,
      3. Najefi A, et al
      . Percutaneous repair followed by accelerated rehabilitation for acute Achilles tendon ruptures. J Orthop Surg (Hong Kong) 2015;23:352–6.
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    40. ↵
      1. Nilsson-Helander K,
      2. Thomeé R,
      3. Silbernagel KG, et al
      . The Achilles tendon Total Rupture Score (ATRS): development and validation. Am J Sports Med 2007;35:421–6. doi:10.1177/0363546506294856
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    41. ↵
      1. Amin NH,
      2. Old AB,
      3. Tabb LP, et al
      . Performance outcomes after repair of complete Achilles tendon ruptures in national basketball association players. Am J Sports Med 2013;41:1864–8. doi:10.1177/0363546513490659
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
      1. Amlang MH,
      2. Christiani P,
      3. Heinz P, et al
      . Die perkutane Naht der Achillessehne mit dem Dresdner Instrument. Oper Orthop Traumatol 2006;18:287–99. doi:10.1007/s00064-006-1178-y
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    43. ↵
      1. Weber M,
      2. Niemann M,
      3. Lanz R, et al
      . Nonoperative treatment of acute rupture of the Achilles tendon: results of a new protocol and comparison with operative treatment. Am J Sports Med 2003;31:685–91.
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
      1. Barfod KW,
      2. Bencke J,
      3. Lauridsen HB, et al
      . Nonoperative dynamic treatment of acute Achilles tendon rupture: the influence of early weight-bearing on clinical outcome: a blinded, randomized controlled trial. J Bone Jt Surg Am 2014;96:1497–503. doi:10.2106/JBJS.M.01273
      OpenUrl
    45. ↵
      1. Bassi JL,
      2. Mahindra P
      . A modified flap technique as an alternate procedure for open Achilles tendon repair (the Bassi method). Oper Orthop Traumatol 2006;18:171–81. doi:10.1007/s00064-006-1169-z
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
      1. Leppilahti J,
      2. Forsman K,
      3. Puranen J, et al
      . Outcome and prognostic factors of Achilles rupture repair using a new scoring method. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1998;346:152–61. doi:10.1097/00003086-199801000-00022
      OpenUrlPubMed
      1. Boyden EM,
      2. Kitaoka HB,
      3. Cahalan TD, et al
      . Late versus early repair of Achilles tendon rupture. Clinical and biomechanical evaluation. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1995;317:150–8.
      OpenUrlPubMed
    48. ↵
      1. Tegner Y,
      2. Lysholm J
      . Rating systems in the evaluation of knee ligament injuries. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1985;198:43–9.
      OpenUrlPubMed
      1. Ceccarelli F,
      2. Berti L,
      3. Giuriati L, et al
      . Percutaneous and minimally invasive techniques of Achilles tendon repair. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2007;458:188–93. doi:10.1097/BLO.0b013e3180396f07
      OpenUrlPubMed
      1. Chandrakant V,
      2. Lozano-Calderon S,
      3. McWilliam J
      . Immediate weight bearing after modified percutaneous Achilles tendon repair. Foot Ankle Int 2012;33:1093–7. doi:10.3113/FAI.2012.1093
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
      1. Chen Z,
      2. Wei J,
      3. Hou Z, et al
      . Application of internal fixation of steel–wire limited loop in early Achilles tendon rupture. Asian Pac J Trop Med 2013;6:902–7. doi:10.1016/S1995-7645(13)60161-3
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
      1. Chiu C-H,
      2. Yeh W-L,
      3. Tsai M-C, et al
      . Endoscopy-assisted percutaneous repair of acute Achilles tendon tears. Foot Ankle Int 2013;34:1168–76. doi:10.1177/1071100713484005
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
      1. Coutts A,
      2. MacGregor A,
      3. Gibson J, et al
      . Clinical and functional results of open operative repair for Achilles tendon rupture in a non-specialist surgical unit. J R Coll Surg Edinb 2002;47:753–62.
      OpenUrlPubMedWeb of Science
      1. Cretnik A,
      2. Kosanovic M,
      3. Smrkolj V
      . Percutaneous versus open repair of the ruptured Achilles tendon: a comparative study. Am J Sports Med 2005;33:1369–79. doi:10.1177/0363546504271501
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
      1. Cretnik A,
      2. Kosir R,
      3. Kosanović M
      . Incidence and outcome of operatively treated Achilles tendon rupture in the elderly. Foot Ankle Int 2010;31:14–18. doi:10.3113/FAI.2010.0014
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
      1. De Carli A,
      2. Vadalà A,
      3. Ciardini R, et al
      . Spontaneous Achilles tendon ruptures treated with a mini-open technique: clinical and functional evaluation. J Sports Med Phys Fitness 2009;49:292–6.
      OpenUrlPubMed
      1. Demirel M,
      2. Turhan E,
      3. Dereboy F, et al
      . Augmented repair of acute tendo Achilles ruptures with gastrosoleus turn down flap. Indian J Orthop 2011;45:45–52. doi:10.4103/0019-5413.73654
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
      1. Doral MN
      . What is the effect of the early weight-bearing mobilisation without using any support after endoscopy-assisted Achilles tendon repair? Knee Surg Sport Traumatol Arthrosc 2013;21:1378–84. doi:10.1007/s00167-012-2222-0
      OpenUrlCrossRef
    59. ↵
      1. Roos EM,
      2. Brandsson S,
      3. Karlsson J
      . Validation of the foot and ankle outcome score for ankle ligament reconstruction. Foot Ankle Int 2001;22:788–94.
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
      1. Eames MHA,
      2. Eames NWA,
      3. McCarthy KR, et al
      . An audit of the combined non-operative and orthotic management of ruptured tendo Achillis. Injury 1997;28:289–92. doi:10.1016/S0020-1383(96)00203-3
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    61. ↵
      1. Feldbrin Z,
      2. Hendel D,
      3. Lipkin A, et al
      . Achilles tendon rupture and our experience with the Achillon device. Isr Med Assoc J 2010;12:609–12.
      OpenUrlPubMed
    62. ↵
      1. Fernández-Fairén M,
      2. Gimeno C
      . Augmented repair of Achilles tendon ruptures. Am J Sports Med 1997;25:177–81. doi:10.1177/036354659702500206
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
      1. Fortis AP,
      2. Dimas A,
      3. Lamprakis AA
      . Repair of Achilles tendon rupture under endoscopic control. Arthrosc J Arthrosc Relat Surg 2008;24:683–8. doi:10.1016/j.arthro.2008.02.018
      OpenUrlCrossRef
      1. Garabito A,
      2. Martinez-Miranda J,
      3. Sanchez-Sotelo J
      . Augmented repair of acute Achilles tendon ruptures using gastrocnemius-soleus fascia. Int Orthop 2005;29:42–6. doi:10.1007/s00264-004-0598-2
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
      1. Garrido IM,
      2. Deval JC,
      3. Bosch MN, et al
      . Treatment of acute Achilles tendon ruptures with Achillon device: clinical outcomes and kinetic gait analysis. Foot Ankle Surg 2010;16:189–94. doi:10.1016/j.fas.2009.10.014
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
      1. Goren D,
      2. Ayalon M,
      3. Nyska M
      . Isokinetic strength and endurance after percutaneous and open surgical repair of Achilles tendon ruptures. Foot Ankle Int 2005;26:286–90.
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
      1. Gorschewsky O,
      2. Vogel U,
      3. Schweizer A, et al
      . Percutaneous tenodesis of the Achilles tendon. A new surgical method for the treatment of acute Achilles tendon rupture through percutaneous tenodesis. Injury 1999;30:315–21.
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
      1. Gorschewsky O,
      2. Pitzl M,
      3. Pütz A, et al
      . Percutaneous repair of acute Achilles tendon rupture. Foot Ankle Int 2004;25:219–24.
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    69. ↵
      1. Groetelaers RPTGC,
      2. Janssen L,
      3. van der Velden J, et al
      . Functional treatment or cast immobilization after minimally invasive repair of an acute Achilles tendon rupture: prospective, randomized trial. Foot Ankle Int 2014;35:771–8. doi:10.1177/1071100714536167
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
      1. Guillo S,
      2. Del Buono A,
      3. Dias M, et al
      . Percutaneous repair of acute ruptures of the tendo Achillis. Surg 2013;11:14–19.
      OpenUrl
      1. Halasi T,
      2. Tállay A,
      3. Berkes I
      . Percutaneous Achilles tendon repair with and without endoscopic control. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2003;11:409–14. doi:10.1007/s00167-003-0397-0
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
      1. Hohendorff B,
      2. Siepen W,
      3. Spiering L, et al
      . Long-term results after operatively treated Achilles tendon rupture: fibrin glue versus suture. J Foot Ankle Surg 2008;47:392–9. doi:10.1053/j.jfas.2008.05.006
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    73. ↵
      1. Hufner TM,
      2. Brandes DB,
      3. Thermann H, et al
      . Long-term results after functional nonoperative treatment of Achilles tendon rupture. Foot Ankle Int 2006;27:167–71.
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
      1. Jaakkola JI,
      2. Beskin JL,
      3. Griffith LH, et al
      . Early ankle motion after triple bundle technique repair vs. casting for acute Achilles tendon rupture. Foot Ankle Int 2001;22:979–84.
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    75. ↵
      1. Jacob KM,
      2. Paterson R
      . Surgical repair followed by functional rehabilitation for acute and chronic Achilles tendon injuries: excellent functional results, patient satisfaction and no reruptures. ANZ J Surg 2007;77:287–91. doi:10.1111/j.1445-2197.2007.04035.x
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
      1. Jallageas R,
      2. Bordes J,
      3. Daviet J-C, et al
      . Evaluation of surgical treatment for ruptured Achilles tendon in 31 athletes. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res 2013;99:577–84. doi:10.1016/j.otsr.2013.03.024
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
      1. Jennings AG,
      2. Sefton GK,
      3. Newman RJ
      . Repair of acute rupture of the Achilles tendon: a new technique using polyester tape without external splintage. Ann R Coll Surg Engl 2004;86:445–8. doi:10.1308/147870804957
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
      1. Josey RA,
      2. Marymont J V,
      3. Varner KE, et al
      . Immediate, full weightbearing cast treatment of acute Achilles tendon ruptures: a long-term follow-up study. Foot Ankle Int 2003;24:775–9.
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
      1. Jung HG,
      2. Lee KB,
      3. Cho SG, et al
      . Outcome of Achilles tendon ruptures treated by a limited open technique. Foot Ankle Int 2008;29:803–7. doi:10.3113/FAI.2008.0803
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    80. ↵
      1. Kakiuchi M
      . A combined open and percutaneous technique for repair of tendo Achillis: comparison with open repair. J Bone Joint Surg Br 1995;77:60–3.
      OpenUrlPubMed
    81. ↵
      1. Karabinas PK,
      2. Benetos IS,
      3. Lampropoulou-Adamidou K, et al
      . Percutaneous versus open repair of acute Achilles tendon ruptures. Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol 2013;24:607–13. doi:10.1007/s00590-013-1350-7
      OpenUrlPubMed
      1. Karkhanis S,
      2. Mumtaz H,
      3. Kurdy N
      . Functional management of Achilles tendon rupture: a viable option for non-operative management. Foot Ankle Surg 2010;16:81–6. doi:10.1016/j.fas.2009.05.010
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    83. ↵
      1. Keating JF,
      2. Will EM
      . Operative versus non-operative treatment of acute rupture of tendo Achillis: a prospective randomised evaluation of functional outcome. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2011;93:1071–8. doi:10.1302/0301-620X.93B8.25998
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
      1. Keller A,
      2. Ortiz C,
      3. Wagner E, et al
      . Mini-open tenorrhaphy of acute Achilles tendon ruptures: medium-term follow-up of 100 cases. Am J Sports Med 2014;42:731–6. doi:10.1177/0363546513511418
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    85. ↵
      1. Klein EE,
      2. Weil L,
      3. Baker JR, et al
      . Retrospective analysis of mini-open repair versus open repair for acute Achilles tendon ruptures. Foot Ankle Spec 2012;6:15–20. doi:10.1177/1938640012463052
      OpenUrlPubMed
      1. Robinson JM,
      2. Cook JL,
      3. Purdam C, et al
      . The VISA-A questionnaire: a valid and reliable index of the clinical severity of Achilles tendinopathy. Br J Sports Med 2001;35:335–41. doi:10.1136/bjsm.35.5.335
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
      1. Knobe M,
      2. Gradl G,
      3. Klos K, et al
      . Is percutaneous suturing superior to open fibrin gluing in acute Achilles tendon rupture? Int Orthop 2015;39:535–42. doi:10.1007/s00264-014-2615-4
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
      1. Kołodziej L,
      2. Bohatyrewicz A,
      3. Kromuszczyńska J, et al
      . Efficacy and complications of open and minimally invasive surgery in acute Achilles tendon rupture: a prospective randomised clinical study—preliminary report. Int Orthop 2013;37:625–9. doi:10.1007/s00264-012-1737-9
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
      1. Korkmaz M,
      2. Erkoc MF,
      3. Yolcu S, et al
      . Weight bearing the same day versus non-weight bearing for 4 weeks in Achilles tendon rupture. J Orthop Sci 2015;20:513–16. doi:10.1007/s00776-015-0710-z
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    90. ↵
      1. Grimby G
      . Physcial activity and muscle training in the elderly. Acta Med Scand 1986;711:233–7.
      OpenUrl
      1. Kraus R,
      2. Stahl J-P,
      3. Meyer C, et al
      . Frequency and effects of intratendinous and peritendinous calcifications after open Achilles tendon repair. Foot Ankle Int 2004;25:827–32.
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
      1. Labib SA,
      2. Hoffler CE,
      3. Shah JN, et al
      . The gift box open Achilles tendon repair method: a retrospective clinical series. J Foot Ankle Surg 2016;55:39–44. doi:10.1053/j.jfas.2015.04.024
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
      1. Lacoste S,
      2. Féron JM,
      3. Cherrier B
      . Percutaneous Tenolig® repair under intra-operative ultrasonography guidance in acute Achilles tendon rupture. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res 2014;100:925–30. doi:10.1016/j.otsr.2014.09.018
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
      1. Lansdaal JR,
      2. Goslings JC,
      3. Reichart M, et al
      . The results of 163 Achilles tendon ruptures treated by a minimally invasive surgical technique and functional after treatment. Injury 2007;38:839–44. doi:10.1016/j.injury.2006.12.010
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    95. ↵
      1. Lee DK
      . A preliminary study on the effects of acellular tissue graft augmentation in acute Achilles tendon ruptures. J Foot Ankle Surg 2008;47:8–12. doi:10.1053/j.jfas.2007.08.015
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
      1. Macquet AJ,
      2. Christensen RJ,
      3. Debenham M, et al
      . Open repair of the acutely torn Achilles tendon under local anaesthetic. ANZ J Surg 2011;81:619–23. doi:10.1111/j.1445-2197.2010.05532.x
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
      1. Maffulli N,
      2. Tallon C,
      3. Wong J, et al
      . Early weightbearing and ankle mobilization after open repair of acute midsubstance tears of the Achilles tendon. Am J Sports Med 2003;31:692–700.
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
      1. Maffulli N,
      2. Longo UG,
      3. Maffulli GD, et al
      . Achilles tendon ruptures in elite athletes. Foot Ankle Int 2011;32:9–15. doi:10.3113/FAI.2011.0009
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
      1. Maffulli N,
      2. Longo UG,
      3. Ronga M, et al
      . Favorable outcome of percutaneous repair of Achilles tendon ruptures in the elderly. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2010;468:1039–46. doi:10.1007/s11999-009-0944-1
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
      1. Majewski M,
      2. Rohrbach M,
      3. Czaja S, et al
      . Avoiding sural nerve injuries during percutaneous Achilles tendon repair. Am J Sports Med 2006;34:793–8. doi:10.1177/0363546505283266
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
      1. Thermann H
      . Die funktionelle Behandlung der frischen Achillessehnenruptur. Berlin, Germany: Springer, 1996.
    102. ↵
      1. Majewski M,
      2. Schaeren S,
      3. Kohlhaas U, et al
      . Postoperative rehabilitation after percutaneous Achilles tendon repair: early functional therapy versus cast immobilization. Disabil Rehabil 2008;30:1726–32. doi:10.1080/09638280701786831
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
      1. Mandelbaum BR,
      2. Myerson MS,
      3. Forster R
      . Achilles tendon ruptures: a new method of repair, early range of motion, and functional rehabilitation. Am J Sports Med 1995;23:392–5. doi:10.1177/036354659502300403
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
      1. Maniscalco P,
      2. Bertone C,
      3. Bonci E, et al
      . Titanium anchors for the repair of distal Achilles tendon ruptures: preliminary report of a new surgical technique. J Foot Ankle Surg 1998;36:96–100. doi:10.1016/S1067-2516(98)80087-2
      OpenUrl
      1. Pavanini G,
      2. Cescati A,
      3. Gigante C
      . Il valore della tenoplastica secondo Silfverskiold nelle rotture cottocutance del tendine d" Achille. Chir Piede 1986;10:293–9.
      OpenUrl
      1. Martinelli B
      . Percutaneous repair of the Achilles tendon in athletes. Bull Hosp Jt Dis 2000;59:149–52.
      OpenUrlPubMed
      1. McComis GP,
      2. Nawoczenski DA,
      3. DeHaven K
      . Functional bracing for rupture of the Achilles tendon: clinical results and analysis of ground-reaction forces and temporal data. J Bone Jt Surg 1997;29A:1799–808.
      OpenUrl
      1. Metz R,
      2. Verleisdonk EJ,
      3. van der Heijden GJ, et al
      . Acute Achilles tendon rupture: minimally invasive surgery versus nonoperative treatment with immediate full weightbearing—a randomized controlled trial. Am J Sports Med 2008;36:1688–94. doi:10.1177/0363546508319312
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
      1. Miller D,
      2. Waterston S,
      3. Reaper J, et al
      . Conservative management, percutaneous or open repair of acute Achilles tendon rupture: a retrospective study. Scott Med J 2005;50:160–5.
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
      1. Mortensen N,
      2. Saether J,
      3. Steinke M, et al
      . Separation of tendon ends after Achilles tendon repair: a prospective, randomized, multicenter study. Orthopedics 1992;15:899–903.
      OpenUrlPubMedWeb of Science
      1. Mortensen HM,
      2. Skov O,
      3. Jensen PE
      . Early motion of the ankle after operative treatment of a rupture of the Achilles tendon. A prospective, randomized clinical and radiographic study. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1999;81:983–90.
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
      1. Motta P,
      2. Errichiello C,
      3. Pontini I
      . Achilles tendon rupture: a new technique for easy surgical repair and immediate movement of the ankle and foot. Am J Sports Med 1997;25:172–6. doi:10.1177/036354659702500205
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
      1. Mukundan C,
      2. El Husseiny M,
      3. Rayan F, et al
      . ‘Mini-open’ repair of acute tendo Achilles ruptures—the solution? Foot Ankle Surg 2010;16:122–5. doi:10.1016/j.fas.2009.07.005
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
      1. Nestorson J,
      2. Movin T,
      3. Moller M, et al
      . Function after Achilles tendon rupture in the elderly: 25 patients older than 65 years followed for 3 years. Scand J Med Sci Sports 2000;71:64–8.
      OpenUrl
      1. Nilsson-Helander K,
      2. Silbernagel KG,
      3. Thomeé R, et al
      . Acute Achilles tendon rupture: a randomized, controlled study comparing surgical and nonsurgical treatments using validated outcome measures. Am J Sports Med 2010;38:2186–93. doi:10.1177/0363546510376052
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    116. ↵
      1. Olsson N,
      2. Silbernagel KG,
      3. Eriksson BI, et al
      . Stable surgical repair with accelerated rehabilitation versus nonsurgical treatment for acute Achilles tendon ruptures: a randomized controlled study. Am J Sports Med 2013;41:2867–76. doi:10.1177/0363546513503282
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
      1. Orr J,
      2. McCriskin B,
      3. Dutton J
      . Achillon mini-open Achilles tendon repair: early outcomes and return to duty results in U.S. military service members. J Surg Orthop Adv 2013;22:23–9. doi:10.3113/JSOA.2013.0023
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
      1. Ozsoy M,
      2. Cengiz B,
      3. Ozsoy A, et al
      . Minimally invasive Achilles tendon repair: a modification of the Achillon technique. Foot Ankle Int 2013;34:1683–8. doi:10.1177/1071100713505754
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
      1. Pajala A,
      2. Kangas J,
      3. Siira P, et al
      . Augmented compared with nonaugmented surgical repair of a fresh total Achilles tendon rupture. A prospective randomized study. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2009;91:1092–100. doi:10.2106/JBJS.G.01089
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    120. ↵
      1. Parekh SG,
      2. Wray WH,
      3. Brimmo O, et al
      . Epidemiology and outcomes of Achilles tendon ruptures in the National Football League. Foot Ankle Spec 2009;2:283–6. doi:10.1177/1938640009351138
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    121. ↵
      1. Park HG,
      2. Moon DH,
      3. Yoon JM
      . Limited open repair of ruptured Achilles tendons with Bunnel-type sutures. Foot Ankle Int 2001;22:985–7.
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
      1. Rajasekar K,
      2. Gholve P,
      3. Faraj A, et al
      . A subjective outcome analysis of tendo-Achilles rupture. J Foot Ankle Surg 2005;44:32–6. doi:10.1053/j.jfas.2004.11.008
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
      1. Rebeccato A,
      2. Santini S,
      3. Salmaso G, et al
      . Repair of the Achilles tendon rupture: a functional comparison of three surgical techniques. J Foot Ankle Surg 2001;40:188–94. doi:10.1016/S1067-2516(01)80018-1
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
      1. Rettig AC,
      2. Liotta FJ,
      3. Klootwyk TE, et al
      . Potential risk of rerupture in primary Achilles tendon repair in athletes younger than 30 years of age. Am J Sports Med 2005;33:119–23. doi:10.1177/0363546504268720
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
      1. Richardson LC,
      2. Reitman R,
      3. Wilson M
      . Achilles tendon ruptures: functional outcome of surgical repair with a ‘pull-out’ wire. Foot Ankle Int 2003;24:439–43.
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    126. ↵
      1. Sanchez M,
      2. Anitua E,
      3. Azofra J, et al
      . Comparison of surgically repaired Achilles tendon tears using platelet-rich fibrin matrices. Am J Sports Med 2007;35:245–51. doi:10.1177/0363546506294078
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
      1. Smith FW,
      2. Rosenlund EA,
      3. Aune AK, et al
      . Subjective functional assessments and the return to competitive sport after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Br J Sports Med 2004;38:279–84. doi:10.1136/bjsm.2002.001982
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
      1. Schepull T,
      2. Kvist J,
      3. Andersson C, et al
      . Mechanical properties during healing of Achilles tendon ruptures to predict final outcome: a pilot Roentgen stereophotogrammetric analysis in 10 patients. BMC Musculoskelet Disord 2007;8:116. doi:10.1186/1471-2474-8-116
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
      1. Silbernagel KG,
      2. Steele R,
      3. Manal K
      . Deficits in heel-rise height and Achilles tendon elongation occur in patients recovering from an Achilles tendon rupture. Am J Sports Med 2012;40:1564–71. doi:10.1177/0363546512447926
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
      1. Soldatis J,
      2. Goodfellow D,
      3. Wilber J
      . End-to-end operative repair of Achilles tendon rupture. Am J Sports Med 1997;25:90–5. doi:10.1177/036354659702500118
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
      1. Solveborn S,
      2. Moberg A
      . Immediate free ankle motion after surgical repair of acute Achilles tendon ruptures. Am J Sports Med 1994;22:607–10. doi:10.1177/036354659402200507
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
      1. Arner O,
      2. Lindholm A
      . Subcutaneous rupture of the Achilles tendon: a study of 92 cases. Acta Chir Scand 1959;116:1–51.
      OpenUrl
      1. Sorrenti S
      . Achilles tendon rupture: effect of early mobilization in rehabilitation after surgical repair. Foot Ankle Int 2006;27:407–10.
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
      1. Speck M,
      2. Klaue K
      . Early full weightbearing and functional treatment after surgical repair of acute Achilles tendon rupture. Am J Sports Med 1998;26:789–93.
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
      1. Stein BE,
      2. Stroh DA,
      3. Schon LC
      . Outcomes of acute Achilles tendon rupture repair with bone marrow aspirate concentrate augmentation. Int Orthop 2015;39:901–5. doi:10.1007/s00264-015-2725-7
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
      1. Strauss E,
      2. Ishak C,
      3. Jazrawi L, et al
      . Operative treatment of acute Achilles tendon ruptures: an institutional review of clinical outcomes. Injury 2007;38:832–8. doi:10.1016/j.injury.2006.06.005
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
      1. Suchak A,
      2. Bostick G,
      3. Beaupre L, et al
      . The influence of early weight-bearing compared with non-weight-bearing after surgical repair of the Achilles tendon. J Bone Jt Surg Am 2008;90:1876–83. doi:10.2106/JBJS.G.01242
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
      1. Talbot J,
      2. Williams G,
      3. Bismil Q, et al
      . Results of accelerated postoperative rehabilitation using novel ‘suture frame’ repair of Achilles tendon rupture. J Foot Ankle Surg 2012;51:147–51. doi:10.1053/j.jfas.2011.10.045
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
      1. Tenenbaum S,
      2. Dreiangel N,
      3. Segal A, et al
      . The percutaneous surgical approach for repairing acute Achilles tendon rupture: a comprehensive outcome assessment. J Am Podiatr Med Assoc 2010;100:270–5. doi:10.7547/1000270
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
      1. Troop RL,
      2. Losse GM,
      3. Lane JG, et al
      . Early motion after repair of Achilles tendon ruptures. Foot Ankle Int 1995;16:705–9. doi:10.1177/107110079501601106
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
      1. Uchiyama E,
      2. Nomura A,
      3. Takeda Y, et al
      . A modified operation for Achilles tendon ruptures. Am J Sports Med 2007;35:1739–43. doi:10.1177/0363546507304492
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
      1. Valente M,
      2. Crucul M,
      3. Alecci V, et al
      . Minimally invasive repair of acute Achilles tendon rupture with Achillon device. Musculoskelet Surg 2012;96:35–9. doi:10.1007/s12306-011-0158-z
      OpenUrlPubMed
      1. Wagnon R,
      2. Akayi M
      . The Webb-Bannister percutaneous technique for acute Achilles’ tendon ruptures: a functional and MRI assessment. J Foot Ankle Surg 2005;44:437–44. doi:10.1053/j.jfas.2005.07.015
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
      1. Wallace RGH,
      2. Heyes GJ,
      3. Michael ALR
      . The non-operative functional management of patients with a rupture of the tendo Achillis leads to low rates of re-rupture. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2011;93:1362–6. doi:10.1302/0301-620X.93B10.26187
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
      1. Wallace RGH,
      2. Traynor IER,
      3. Kernohan WG, et al
      . Combined conservative and orthotic management of acute ruptures of the Achilles tendon. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2004;86-A:1198–202.
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
      1. Young SW,
      2. Patel A,
      3. Zhu M, et al
      . Weight-bearing in the nonoperative treatment of acute Achilles tendon ruptures: a randomized controlled trial. J Bone Jt Surg 2014;96:1073–9. doi:10.2106/JBJS.M.00248
      OpenUrl
    147. ↵
      1. Halasi T
      . Development of a new activity score for the evaluation of ankle instability. Am J Sports Med 2004;32:899–908. doi:10.1177/0363546503262181
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    148. ↵
      1. Ardern CL,
      2. Taylor NF,
      3. Feller JA, et al
      . Return-to-sport outcomes at 2 to 7 years after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction surgery. Am J Sports Med 2012;40:41–8. doi:10.1177/0363546511422999
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    149. ↵
      1. Silbernagel KG,
      2. Nilsson-Helander K,
      3. Thomeé R, et al
      . A new measurement of heel-rise endurance with the ability to detect functional deficits in patients with Achilles tendon rupture. Knee Surg Sport Traumatol Arthrosc 2010;18:258–64. doi:10.1007/s00167-009-0889-7
      OpenUrlCrossRef
    150. ↵
      1. Brorsson A,
      2. Olsson N,
      3. Nilsson-Helander K, et al
      . Recovery of calf muscle endurance 3 months after an Achilles tendon rupture. Scand J Med Sci Sports 2015. doi: 10.1111/sms.12533 doi:10.1111/sms.12533
    151. ↵
      1. Olsson N,
      2. Karlsson J,
      3. Eriksson BI, et al
      . Ability to perform a single heel-rise is significantly related to patient-reported outcome after Achilles tendon rupture. Scand J Med Sci Sport 2014;24:152–8. doi:10.1111/j.1600-0838.2012.01497.x
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    152. ↵
      1. Schepull T,
      2. Kvist J,
      3. Aspenberg P
      . Early E-modulus of healing Achilles tendons correlates with late function: similar results with or without surgery. Scand J Med Sci Sport 2012;22:18–23. doi:10.1111/j.1600-0838.2010.01154.x
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    153. ↵
      1. Mani SB,
      2. Brown HC,
      3. Nair P, et al
      . Validation of the Foot and Ankle Outcome Score in adult acquired flatfoot deformity. Foot Ankle Int 2013;34:1140–6. doi:10.1177/1071100713483117
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    154. ↵
      1. Chen L,
      2. Lyman S,
      3. Do H, et al
      . Validation of the foot and ankle outcome score for hallux valgus. Foot Ankle Int 2012;33:1145–55. doi:10.3113/FAI.2012.1145
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    155. ↵
      1. Herring SA,
      2. Bergfeld JA,
      3. Boyd J, et al
      . The team physician and return-to-play issues: a consensus statement. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2002;34:1212–14. doi:10.1097/00005768-200207000-00025
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    View Abstract

    Footnotes

    • Contributors JAZ was one of the primary drafters of the manuscript, performed article review, data extraction and data analysis. MRC was one of the primary drafters of the manuscript, developed study concept and performed article review and data extraction. KGS developed study concept and research design, assisted in article review, data extraction and data analysis and provided critical feedback of the manuscript.

    • Funding This study was supported by the National Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases of the National Institute of Health under awards R21 AR067390 and the University of Delaware Research Foundation. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institutes of Health.

    • Competing interests None declared.

    • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.

    Linked Articles