Retrospective comparison of open and percutaneous repair methods in acute Achilles’ tendon repair

Purpose: In recent years Achilles’ tendon tears are becoming more common. Open and percutaneous repair methods have been described in the surgical treatment of tendon tears. The aim of this study is to determine whether there is a difference between open repair and percutaneous repair. Methods: Patients who underwent surgical repair due to acute Achilles’ tendon full-thickness rupture in our clinic, were included in the study. Open repair was performed for one group of patients and percutaneous repair was performed for the other. At the end of follow-up, clinical scores and complication rates were compared statistically. Results: Thirty-six patients with a mean age of 46.3 years were included in the study. Nineteen patients were treated with the open method and seventeen patients with the percutaneous method. The mean follow-up period was 27.3 months for both groups. Mean Leppilahti scores were 94.71 in the percutaneous repair group and 90.79 in the open repair group (p>0.05). Re-rupture, deep infection and DVT rates were similar (p>0.05). Skin necrosis was more common in the open repair group (p