Comparison of outcomes between minimally invasive percutaneous bunnell suture and traditional open modified Kessler technique for acute closed achilles tendon rupture: A single-center cohort study
Abstract
Percutaneous Bunnell repair and open modified Kessler repair remain debated options for acute Achilles tendon rupture (AATR). We retrospectively compared a minimally invasive percutaneous Bunnell technique (Group A) with an open modified Kessler repair (Group B) within a standardized early functional rehabilitation (EFR) protocol at a single center. Fifty-five adults with closed AATR treated between January 2021 and December 2022 were analyzed (Group A, n = 25; Group B, n = 30). Between-group comparisons used Welch t tests for continuous variables and χ² or Fisher exact tests for categorical variables; American Orthopaedic Foot & Ankle Society (AOFAS) and Achilles Tendon Total Rupture Score (ATRS) were assessed at 12 and 24 weeks, with Holm adjustment applied within each scale. Compared with Group B, Group A had shorter operative time (56.6 ± 15.1 vs 68.2 ± 23.2 minutes; mean difference −11.6; 95% CI −22.05 to −1.15; P = 0.030), less intraoperative blood loss (28.4 ± 8.4 vs 74.7 ± 19.4 mL; −46.3; 95% CI −54.22 to −38.38; P < 0.001), and a shorter length of stay (4.8 ± 2.0 vs 6.6 ± 2.9 days; −1.8; 95% CI −3.13 to −0.47; P = 0.009). At 12 weeks, AOFAS favored Group A (+1.36; 95% CI + 0.19 to +2.53; P = 0.047) and ATRS also favored Group A (+1.73; 95% CI + 0.48 to +2.98; P = 0.008). At 24 weeks, AOFAS was not different (+0.51; 95% CI −0.49 to +1.51; P = 0.312), whereas ATRS remained higher in Group A (+2.17; 95% CI + 0.88 to +3.46; P = 0.003). Overall complications were 12.0% vs 26.7% (risk difference −14.7%; 95% CI −34.10 to +7.20; P = 0.310); no sural nerve injuries occurred. Within an EFR framework, percutaneous Bunnell repair provided superior perioperative efficiency with comparable safety and modest, sub-MCID functional advantages, supporting confirmation in larger prospective studies.
Article Details
Authors (7)
Zihang Zhao
Xi’an Key Laboratory of Special Energy Materials, School of Chemical Engineering
Xiang Zhang
Xi Hou
Zihan Liu
Shenzhen Key Laboratory of Interfacial Science and Engineering of Materials, State Environmental Protection Key Laboratory of Integrated Surface Water-Groundwater Pollution Control, Guangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Soil and Groundwater Pollution Control, SUSTech Energy Institute for Carbon Neutrality, State Key Laboratory of Soil Pollution Control and Safety, School of Environmental Science and Engineering
Zhiyong Hou
Lianxin Song
Ruipeng Zhang