MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1970585959 · doi:10.1007/s11999-013-3350-7

Cochrane in CORR ®: Surgical Interventions for Treating Acute Achilles Tendon Ruptures (Review)

2013· letter· en· W1970585959 on OpenAlexaff
Raman Mundi, Kim Madden, Mohit Bhandari

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Orthopaedics and Related Research · 2013
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTendon Structure and Treatment
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAchilles tendonSports medicineSurgeryMEDLINETendonPhysical therapy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Importance of the Topic In recent decades, the increasing interest in competitive and recreational sport participation among aging adults has been accompanied by a rise in sports-related injuries [2, 5]. Rupture of the Achilles tendon is one of the most common such injuries, typically afflicting men in their fourth and fifth decades of life [2, 4]. It is estimated that the incidence of these injuries is 18 per 100,000 in some regions, a considerable rise from the two per 100,000 estimates in the 1980 s [2-4]. Despite the rising incidence, as well as the lengthy disability and rehabilitation associated with Achilles tendon ruptures, the ideal method of managing such injuries remains a matter of debate [5]. As per the clinical practice guidelines approved by the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons, both surgical and nonsurgical treatment of acute Achilles tendon ruptures are acceptable options. However, the grade of recommendation remains weak for both treatment options, as there is a paucity of high-quality evidence and inconsistency in results to make strong recommendations either way [1]. Accordingly, a rigorous systematic review and meta-analysis of available high-quality evidence was warranted. Upon Closer Inspection Khan and Smith [3] performed a robust meta-analysis comparing several aspects in the management of acute Achilles tendon ruptures. Rerupture rates, complication rates (infections, adhesions, nerve injury) and long-term function, appropriately formed the primary outcomes in this review for which definitive conclusions were sought. However, the capacity of a systematic review to draw unequivocal conclusions hinges directly on the quality of studies that comprise it. Among the 12 randomized controlled trials included in this review, only five (42%) had adequate allocation concealment, four (33%) did not report the method of randomization, and no studies reported the use of blinded outcome assessors. Additionally, there was considerable variation amongst the trials in their postsurgical and nonsurgical rehabilitation protocols. Pooled treatment effects are difficult to interpret in such circumstances, as outcomes are influenced by both the intervention and rehabilitation. Because of the limited number of studies, pooled estimates could not be calculated across all comparisons being investigated. A compelling analysis was that of open surgical repair to nonsurgical management, in which the pooled estimates demonstrated lower rerupture rates (5% versus 12%, risk ratio [RR], 0.41), but higher rates of infection (RR 4.89), adhesions (RR, 11.73), and nerve injury (RR, 7.44) associated with surgical repair. However, this analysis consisted of six small trials with a small number of events in each trial. Take-Home Message Open surgical repair for the management of acute Achilles tendon ruptures appears favorable to nonsurgical management with respect to decreasing the risk of tendon rerupture, but has a higher risk of associated wound and nerve complications. Both surgical and nonsurgical management of such patients remain valid treatment options, as neither has proven superior in all patient important outcomes. However, additional trials that had been identified by the authors at the time of this review, but were not available for inclusion, have since been published. For instance, Willits et al. [6] performed a multicenter randomized trial of 144 patients that were randomized to either open surgical repair with accelerated rehabilitation or to accelerated rehabilitation alone. This trial found no significant difference in rerupture rates between the surgical and nonsurgical treatment arms at three months followup. These findings have been further corroborated by a recent meta-analysis of ten randomized trials comparing surgical intervention to nonsurgical treatment. A stratified analysis demonstrated no significant difference in rerupture rates if a functional rehabilitation protocol with early range of motion was instituted in the nonsurgical group (adjusted relative risk [ARR], 1.7%), whereas surgery significantly reduced rerupture when compare to prolonged immobilization (ARR, 8.8%) [5]. As such, the decision to proceed with surgical versus nonsurgical treatment in the management of acute Achilles tendon ruptures remains a matter of ongoing debate. Given the available evidence, treatment decisions should largely be made based on the available rehabilitation protocol and the preferences of a well-informed patient [5].

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity
Consensus categoriesResearch integrity
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.600
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0020.008
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.134
GPT teacher head0.513
Teacher spread0.379 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations6
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical Orthopaedics and Related ResearchSame topicTendon Structure and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207