| Objective To compare and analyze the clinical effect of the minimally invasive improvement of Bunnell suture and the traditional open operation in managing acute non-open ruptures of the Achilles tendon.Methods From January 2021 to January 2024, all 46 patients admitted to Kaiping Central Hospital with an acute closed Achilles tendon rupture were divided into two groups according to their treatment method: A minimally invasive group of 21 patients and a traditional group of 25 patients. The following were recorded for both groups: Incision size, operation time, intraoperative bleeding, length of hospital stay, incidence of postoperative complications, visual analogue scale (VAS) score, and American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS) ankle joint function score.Results All patients were followed up for 9-15 months, with an average of (12.02±1.68) months. The minimally invasive group was significantly better than the traditional group in several parameters: Incision size [(1.88±0.38) cm vs (10.86±1.46) cm)], operation time-consuming [(34.62±4.30) min vs (46.60±7.05) min], surgical blood loss [(6.67±2.42) mL vs (28.80±8.33) mL], the length of hospitalization [(6.05±1.83) d vs (11.88±2.68) d], VAS score [(1.14±0.57) points vs (1.84±0.80) points], AOFAS score [(91.62±2.71) points vs (82.20±9.70) points] all showed significant advantages, and the differences between groups were statistically significant (all P<0.05). There are no complications in the minimally invasive group, while in the traditional group, 2 cases had partial necrosis of the incision skin margin and 1 case had suture rejection reaction.Conclusion Compared with traditional open surgery, percutaneous minimally invasive suturing technology has significant advantages in treating acute non-open ruptures of the Achilles tendon, and the clinical efficacy is satisfactory. |
