Surgical Management of Achilles Tendon Ruptures in the United States 2006-2020, an ABOS Part II Oral Examination Case List Database Study

Abstract

Background: In correlation with a growing body of evidence regarding nonoperative management for Achilles tendon rupture (ATR), studies from Europe and Canada have displayed a decreasing incidence in surgical management, which has not been noted in the United States. The primary objective of this study is to evaluate the US trend in ATR repair volume. Methods: The American Board of Orthopaedic Surgery (ABOS) Part II Oral Examination Case List Database was used. All cases using Current Procedural Terminology codes for primary ATR repair were requested from the years 2006-2020. Total submitted Achilles repair volume, the number of candidates submitting an Achilles repair case, and the overall submitted case volume per examination year was analyzed. Poisson and linear regressions were used to determine statistically significant trends. Results: The total number of Achilles repair cases submitted for the ABOS Part II Oral Examination significantly increased from 2006 to 2011 and then decreased until 2020. Taking Achilles repair cases as a proportion of total orthopaedic cases submitted, the same trend was seen. The number of candidates submitting an Achilles repair case increased from 2006 to 2009 and then decreased until 2020. Foot and Ankle fellowship-trained candidates submitted an increasing number of ATR repair cases per candidate during the time period studied. Conclusion: This is the first study to demonstrate a decline in the volume of ATR repair in the United States. The decline in ATR repair volume seen in the ABOS Part II Case Lists does not match previously published US surgeon practice patterns but is not necessarily generalizable to beyond this period. Although the overall ATR repair volume in the ABOS Part II Case Lists is decreasing, we found Foot and Ankle fellowship-trained surgeons are operating on an increasing number of ATRs during their board collection period. Level of Evidence: Level III, retrospective cohort study.