Abstract
Surgical repair of insertional Achilles tendinosis is indicated in the face of failed
conservative measures. Several methods for this repair have been described, and the
optimal method is not universally agreed upon. In addition, the cost of medical care
is important, and should be considered when determining the surgical repair for each
patient. The purpose of this study is to compare implant costs between a single anchor
or 4 anchor, double row repair, and evaluate associated outcomes. A retrospective
comparative trial was performed for this purpose. The entire study encompassed 110
patients, 78 with a single anchor repair, and 32 with a double row repair. The average
implant cost of the single anchor repair was $391.18 ± $272.10 and the double row
repair was $1811.29± $169.47, p<0.001. The groups did not have a statistically significant
difference in complications (9% with single anchor vs. 6.3% with double row, p=1.0)
or revisions 6.4% with single anchor vs. 3.1% with double row, p=0.67). The only difference
in demographics between the groups was that the single anchor group had a higher percentage
of female patients (p=0.04). While the double row repair has been shown to have favorable
biomechanical results, the present study did not show a benefit in complications or
revisions and was a more costly repair technique. Surgeons should take these findings
in consideration when choosing the repair technique when surgery is indicated.
Level of Evidence: 3, Retrospective Comparative Study
Keywords
To read this article in full you will need to make a payment
Purchase one-time access:
Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online accessOne-time access price info
- For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
- For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'
Subscribe:
Subscribe to The Journal of Foot and Ankle SurgeryAlready a print subscriber? Claim online access
Already an online subscriber? Sign in
Register: Create an account
Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect
References
- Insertional tendiopathy of the Achilles: debridement, primary repair, and when to augment.Foot Ankle Clin. 2017; 22: 761-780
- Current concept review: insertional Achilles tendinopathy.Foot Ankle Int. 2010; 31: 933-939
- Achilles tendinopathy.J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2002; 84: 2062-2076
- Disorders of the insertion of the Achilles tendon and Achilles tendinits.J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1998; 80: 1814-1824
- Surgical takedown approaches to insertional Achilles tendinopathy: a systematic review.J Foot Ankle Surg. 2021; 60: 1217-1221
- Intermediate and longterm outcomes of the suture bridge technique for the management of insertional Achilles tendinopathy.Foot Ankle Spec. 2013; 6: 185-190
- Achilles tendon reattachment after surgical treatment of insertional tendinosis using the suture bridge technique: a case series.J Foot Ankle Surg. 2012; 51: 487-493
- Risk of avulsion of the Achilles tendon after partial excision for treatment of insertional tendonitis and Haglund's deformity: a biomechanical study.Foot Ankle Int. 1999; 20: 433-437
- Insertional Achilles tendinosis: surgical treatment through a central tendon splitting approach.Foot Ankle. 2002; 23 (Int): 19-25
- Technique and results of Achilles tendon reconstruction for insertional Achilles tendinosis.Foot Ankle Int. 2006; 27: 677-684
- Surgical correction of Halgund's triad using complete detachment and reattachment of the Achilles tendon.J Foot Ankle Surg. 2009; 48: 447-451
- Biomechanical properties of double- and single-row suture anchor repair for surgical treatment of insertional Achilles tendinopathy.Am J Sports Med. 2013; 41: 1642-1648
- Single-row versus double-row repair of the distal Achilles tendon: a biomechanical comparison.J Foot Ankle Surg. 2012; 51: 762-766
- Early weightbearing using Achilles suture bridge technique for insertional Achilles tendinosis: a review of 43 patients.J Foot Ankle Surg. 2013; 52: 575-579
- Insertional Achilles tendinopathy: analysis of 166 procedures and return to activity.J Foot Ankle Surg. 2021; 60: 1117-1123
- Cost-effectiveness of surgical techniques in hallux valgus.Foot Ankle Clin. 2020; 25: 19-29
- Cost comparison of crossed screws versus dorsal plate construct for first metatarsophalangeal joint arthrodesis.J Foot Ankle Surg. 2008; 47: 13-18
- Percutaneous Kirschner wire versus commercial implant for hammertoe repair: a cost-effectiveness analysis.J Foot Ankle Surg. 2018; 57: 332-338
- Experience with navigation in total ankle arthroplasty. Is it worth the cost?.Foot Ankle Clin. 2017; 22: 455-463
- Is total ankle arthroplasty a cost-effective alternative to ankle fusion?.Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2011; 469: 1721-1727
- Nationwide analysis of total ankle replacement and ankle arthrodesis in medicare: trends, complications, and cost.Foot Ankle Spec. 2020; https://doi.org/10.1177/1938640020950181
- Sanders II/III calcaneus fractures in laborers: a cost-effectiveness analysis and call for effectiveness research.J Orthop Trauma. 2017; 31: 299-304
- Court-Brown CM. A prospective randomized controlled trial of the fibular nail versus standard open reduction and internal fixation for fixation of ankle fractures in elderly patients.Bone Joint J. 2016; (98-B(9)): 1248-1252
- Comparison of costs in ankle fractures treated with absorbable or metallic fixation devices.Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 1997; 116: 204-208
- Outcomes and material cost comparison of transosseous versus suture anchor fixation of the Achilles tendon: a retrospectivce study.J Foot Ankle Surg. 2022; 61: 12-16
- Office based anesthesia update: guidelines, education and support are invaluable.ASA Newsl. 1999; 4: 4-7
- Role of the anesthesiologist in the next millennium: perioperative gatekeeper?.ASA Newsl. 1999; 5: 17-19
- SAMBA: advocating for patients as we look toward the future.ASA Newsl. 2004; 10: 10-12
- Catlin A; National Health Expenditure Accounts Team. National health care spending in 2018: growth driven by accelerations in Medicare and private insurance spending.Health Aff (Millwood). 2020; 39: 8-17
Article info
Publication history
Edited by Dr. D.S. Malay
Publication stage
In Press Accepted ManuscriptIdentification
Copyright
Published by Elsevier Inc. on behalf of the American College of Foot and Ankle Surgeons.
