There is debate among orthopedic and podiatric surgeons regarding operative and no operative repair of ruptured Achilles tendons. Why the debate? Because outcome studies have shown satisfactory results when comparing each treatment. These studies focus on strength restoration, pain scores, and quality of life. Unfortunately, we cannot directly compare individual patient outcomes, since a patient can only have been treated one way or the other.

In my experience surgical repair is generally preferred for this injury unless there is compelling reasons to treat conservatively. This would include excessive smoking, uncontrolled systemic conditions like diabetes, demonstration of non compliance with physician direction, or extremes of age. Otherwise, this tendon can be repaired in a way that matches the contralateral limb in function and power and can be restored to its pre injury state predictably with surgical methods. That goes for chronic and delayed repairs as well.

I trained in an era before percutaneous techniques emerged. Open repair is the gold standard for surgical treatment. This method allows complete visualization of the injury, direct reapproximation of the tendon ends, and the ability to match the injury to the mechanical construct required for repair. Without visualization, the surgeon cannot adequately assess the integrity of the ruptured ends, instead relying on the instrumentation that employs a "one size fits all" approach. Coupled with a higher incidence of sural nerve injury, there is little benefit in my mind to not simply opening the injury and fixing it.

The content of this podcast is for educational and informational purposes only and does not constitute medical advice. Always seek the advice of your physician or other qualified health provider with any questions you may have regarding a medical condition.