Fast Functional Rehabilitation Protocol versus Plaster Cast Immobilization Protocol after Achilles Tendon Tenorrhaphy: Is It Different? Clinical, Ultrasonographic, and Elastographic Comparison

Abstract

Background: the incidence of Achilles tendon (AT) rupture is rising; however, there is no clear consensus regarding the optimal treatment. The aim of this retrospective study was to compare instrumental and patient-reported outcome scores after fast functional rehabilitation (group A) versus plaster cast immobilization (group B) programs in patients who underwent AT tenorrhaphy. Methods: 33 patients, with similar clinical and demographic features, underwent open AT tenorrhaphy between January and July 2018. Of these, 15 patients were treated with fast functional rehabilitation program (group A), and 18 patients were treated with plaster cast immobilization protocol (group B). Sural triceps hypotrophy and functional scores (American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS) Ankle–Hindfoot Score, and Achilles tendon Total Rupture Score (ATRS)) were recorded at a 12-month follow-up. Ultrasonography (US) and elastosonography (ES) were used to compare the characteristics of the tendons after surgery. Results: At 12 months, no significant differences in any of the patient-reported outcomes or the instrumental measurement tests were seen between the two groups. Conclusions: fast functional rehabilitation after AT surgical repair is safe, effective, and may be the first choice of treatment, especially in young, collaborative, and active patients.

Keywords

• Achilles tendon
• early rehabilitation
• ultrasonography
• elastosonography
• rupture
• surgical repair