Lateral versus central tendon-splitting approach to insertional Achilles tendinopathy: a retrospective study.

INTRODUCTION

This study aimed to compare operative outcomes between the lateral approach (LA) and the central approach (CA) to insertional Achilles tendinopathy (IAT).

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed patients who underwent surgical treatment for IAT using the LA or CA. Patients' demographic data, postoperative complications and satisfaction rate were reviewed. Clinical outcomes were prospectively assessed preoperatively, at three months postoperatively and at the last visit, including patients' visual analogue scale (VAS) scores for pain, American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS) Ankle-Hindfoot Scale scores and 36-item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36) scores.

RESULTS

There were 39 patients in the LA group and 32 in the CA group. In each group, average VAS and AOFAS Scale scores improved significantly. SF-36 scores improved in most parameters. No significant difference in baseline score; average AOFAS Scale score at each visit; and mean VAS score preoperatively and at last visit; satisfaction rate; and overall complication rate were observed between the groups. The mean VAS score in the LA group at postoperative three months was significantly lower than that in the CA group (2.7 ± 2.5 vs. 4.4 ± 3.0; p = 0.016). There were significantly more cases of delayed wound healing in the LA group than in the CA group (2.6% vs. 15.6%; p = 0.049).

CONCLUSION

Both approaches had comparable outcomes for IAT in terms of functional improvement, pain relief, overall enhancement of patients' health condition and overall postoperative complication rate. The LA provided better short-term pain relief and reduced delayed wound healing compared with the CA.