4.5 Article

Endoscopic surgery in chronic achilles tendinopathies: A preliminary report

出版社

W B SAUNDERS CO-ELSEVIER INC
DOI: 10.1053/jars.2002.30065b

关键词

tendon; achilles; endoscopy; tendinitis; surgery

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Purpose: The objective of this prospective study was to evaluate preliminary results or an endoscopic-assisted surgical technique for patients suffering from chronic Achilles tendinopathies. Type of Study: Case series. Methods: Endoscopic operations were performed on 7 consecutive patients involved in recreational sports suffering from chronic Achilles tendon (AT) lesions in whom conservative treatment had failed. Diagnoses included 2 patients with pure peritendinitis, 4 with peritendinitis and degenerative tendinosis, and 1 with a chronic partial tear. Patients were preoperatively and postoperatively evaluated at a mean follow-up period of 16 months (range, 6 to 27 months) with a 0-100 points rating system. All patients were studied preoperatively with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and 6 were re-evaluated with the same procedure after surgery. All surgical interventions were performed on an ambulatory basis and 5 under local anesthesia. The surgical endoscopic technique consisted of peritenon release and debridement in cases with pure peritendinitis. In addition, 2 longitudinal tenotomies were performed in cases with degenerative tendinosis or partial tears. Results: According to the scoring system used, all 7 patients had improved final outcome after surgery from a mean of 39 points preoperatively to 88 points postoperatively. The patient with an AT partial tear achieved the lowest score. The only complications were a minor hematoma and edema that resolved spontaneously. Postoperative MRI in patients with tendinosis failed to show evidence of degenerative areas. Conclusions: Endoscopic surgery may be a valid alternative to treat Achilles tendinopathies unresponsive to conservative treatment because of potential lower morbidity.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据