Fast functional rehabilitation protocol versus plaster cast immobilization protocol after achilles tendon tenorrhaphy: is it different? clinical, ultrasonographic, and elastographic comparison

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...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores: Mosconi, Mario, Pasta, Gianluigi, Annunziata, Salvatore, Guerrieri, Viviana, Ghiara, Matteo, Perelli, Simone, Torriani, Camilla, Grassi, Federico Alberto, Jannelli, Eugenio
Tipo de recurso: artículo
Estado:Versión publicada
Fecha de publicación:2022
País:España
Institución:Varias* (Consorci de Biblioteques Universitáries de Catalunya, Centre de Serveis Científics i Acadèmics de Catalunya)
Repositorio:Recercat. Dipósit de la Recerca de Catalunya
OAI Identifier:oai:recercat.cat:10230/55591
Acceso en línea:http://hdl.handle.net/10230/55591
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics12081824
Access Level:acceso abierto
Palabra clave:Achilles tendon
Early rehabilitation
Elastosonography
Rupture
Surgical repair
Ultrasonography
id ES_e4121e896b91c4287ea11bf560aa88ed
oai_identifier_str oai:recercat.cat:10230/55591
network_acronym_str ES
network_name_str España
repository_id_str
spelling Fast functional rehabilitation protocol versus plaster cast immobilization protocol after achilles tendon tenorrhaphy: is it different? clinical, ultrasonographic, and elastographic comparisonMosconi, MarioPasta, GianluigiAnnunziata, SalvatoreGuerrieri, VivianaGhiara, MatteoPerelli, SimoneTorriani, CamillaGrassi, Federico AlbertoJannelli, EugenioAchilles tendonEarly rehabilitationElastosonographyRuptureSurgical repairUltrasonographyBackground: 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.MDPI202320232022info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionapplication/pdfapplication/pdfhttp://hdl.handle.net/10230/55591http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics12081824reponame:Recercat. Dipósit de la Recerca de Catalunyainstname:Varias* (Consorci de Biblioteques Universitáries de Catalunya, Centre de Serveis Científics i Acadèmics de Catalunya)InglésCopyright © 2022 by Mosconi M, Pasta G, Annunziata S, Guerrieri V, Ghiara M, Perelli S, et al. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessoai:recercat.cat:10230/555912026-05-29T05:05:01Z
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Fast functional rehabilitation protocol versus plaster cast immobilization protocol after achilles tendon tenorrhaphy: is it different? clinical, ultrasonographic, and elastographic comparison
title Fast functional rehabilitation protocol versus plaster cast immobilization protocol after achilles tendon tenorrhaphy: is it different? clinical, ultrasonographic, and elastographic comparison
spellingShingle Fast functional rehabilitation protocol versus plaster cast immobilization protocol after achilles tendon tenorrhaphy: is it different? clinical, ultrasonographic, and elastographic comparison
Mosconi, Mario
Achilles tendon
Early rehabilitation
Elastosonography
Rupture
Surgical repair
Ultrasonography
title_short Fast functional rehabilitation protocol versus plaster cast immobilization protocol after achilles tendon tenorrhaphy: is it different? clinical, ultrasonographic, and elastographic comparison
title_full Fast functional rehabilitation protocol versus plaster cast immobilization protocol after achilles tendon tenorrhaphy: is it different? clinical, ultrasonographic, and elastographic comparison
title_fullStr Fast functional rehabilitation protocol versus plaster cast immobilization protocol after achilles tendon tenorrhaphy: is it different? clinical, ultrasonographic, and elastographic comparison
title_full_unstemmed Fast functional rehabilitation protocol versus plaster cast immobilization protocol after achilles tendon tenorrhaphy: is it different? clinical, ultrasonographic, and elastographic comparison
title_sort Fast functional rehabilitation protocol versus plaster cast immobilization protocol after achilles tendon tenorrhaphy: is it different? clinical, ultrasonographic, and elastographic comparison
dc.creator.none.fl_str_mv Mosconi, Mario
Pasta, Gianluigi
Annunziata, Salvatore
Guerrieri, Viviana
Ghiara, Matteo
Perelli, Simone
Torriani, Camilla
Grassi, Federico Alberto
Jannelli, Eugenio
author Mosconi, Mario
author_facet Mosconi, Mario
Pasta, Gianluigi
Annunziata, Salvatore
Guerrieri, Viviana
Ghiara, Matteo
Perelli, Simone
Torriani, Camilla
Grassi, Federico Alberto
Jannelli, Eugenio
author_role author
author2 Pasta, Gianluigi
Annunziata, Salvatore
Guerrieri, Viviana
Ghiara, Matteo
Perelli, Simone
Torriani, Camilla
Grassi, Federico Alberto
Jannelli, Eugenio
author2_role author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
dc.subject.none.fl_str_mv Achilles tendon
Early rehabilitation
Elastosonography
Rupture
Surgical repair
Ultrasonography
topic Achilles tendon
Early rehabilitation
Elastosonography
Rupture
Surgical repair
Ultrasonography
description 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.
publishDate 2022
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2022
2023
2023
dc.type.none.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.none.fl_str_mv http://hdl.handle.net/10230/55591
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics12081824
url http://hdl.handle.net/10230/55591
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics12081824
dc.language.none.fl_str_mv Inglés
language_invalid_str_mv Inglés
dc.rights.none.fl_str_mv http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
rights_invalid_str_mv http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv application/pdf
application/pdf
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv MDPI
publisher.none.fl_str_mv MDPI
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv reponame:Recercat. Dipósit de la Recerca de Catalunya
instname:Varias* (Consorci de Biblioteques Universitáries de Catalunya, Centre de Serveis Científics i Acadèmics de Catalunya)
instname_str Varias* (Consorci de Biblioteques Universitáries de Catalunya, Centre de Serveis Científics i Acadèmics de Catalunya)
reponame_str Recercat. Dipósit de la Recerca de Catalunya
collection Recercat. Dipósit de la Recerca de Catalunya
repository.name.fl_str_mv
repository.mail.fl_str_mv
_version_ 1869422559070519296
score 15,812455

Similares en LA Referencia