Skip to main content
Download PDF

Both gastrocnemius aponeurosis flaps and semitendinosus tendon grafts are effective in the treatment of chronic Achilles tendon ruptures – a systematic review

BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders volume 24, Article number: 951 (2023) Cite this article

Abstract

Introduction

A chronic Achilles tendon rupture (ATR) is defined as an ATR that has been left untreated for more than four weeks following rupture. This systematic review aims to summarize the outcomes of chronic ATR treated using either a gastrocnemius aponeurosis flap or semitendinosus tendon graft.

Methods

A systematic search was conducted in three databases (PubMed, Scopus and Cochrane), for studies describing outcomes after surgical treatment of chronic ATR using gastrocnemius aponeurosis flaps or semitendinosus tendon grafts with more than 10 patients included. The studies were assessed for quality and risk of bias using the Methodological Items used to assess risk of bias in Non-Randomized Studies (MINORS).

Results

Out of the 818 studies identified with the initial search, a total of 36 studies with 763 individual patients were included in this systematic review. Gastrocnemius aponeurosis flap was used in 21 and semitendinosus tendon graft was used in 13 of the studies. The mean (SD) postoperative Achilles tendon Total Rupture Score (ATRS) for patients treated with a gastrocnemius aponeurosis flap was 83 (14) points and the mean (SD) American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Score (AOFAS) was 96 (1.7) points compared with ATRS 88 (6.9) points and AOFAS 92 (5.6) points for patients treated with a semitendinosus tendon graft. The included studies generally had low-quality according to MINORS, with a median of 8 (range 2–13) for all studies.

Conclusion

Both gastrocnemius aponeurosis flaps and semitendinosus tendon grafts give acceptable results with minimal complications and are valid methods for treating chronic ATR. The main difference is more wound healing complications in patients treated with a gastrocnemius aponeurosis flap and more sural nerve injuries in patients treated with a semitendinosus grafts. The current literature on the subject is of mainly low quality and the absence of a patient-related outcome measure validated for chronic ATR makes comparisons between studies difficult.

Level of evidence

Level IV.

Peer Review reports

Introduction

Medical history and clinical examinations are considered to be sufficient in establishing the diagnosis of an acute Achilles tendon rupture [34, 42]. However, occasionally treatment is delayed due to late presentation or misdiagnosis [8, 42]. A delay of treatment leads to larger tendon-end diastasis with interposed scar tissue [9]. Achilles tendon ruptures that have had a delay in treatment by more than 4 weeks, are termed chronic and surgical intervention is required to recover lower leg function [1, 7, 14, 28, 30]. The traditional surgical intervention for chronic Achilles tendon ruptures involves considerably larger incisions than acute repairs leading to an increased risk of complications, such as infections and inadequate wound-healing [41].

Patients with chronic Achilles tendon ruptures report different symptoms compared with those of acute ruptures. Long-term pain and recurrent swelling are more frequent in patients with chronic ruptures [28]. In addition, altered gait with a weakness at push-off, a poor balance, and a reduced capability of performing heel-rises are commonly reported [17, 42].

The literature includes various surgical techniques for the management of chronic Achilles tendon ruptures: V–Y plasty, tendon transfers, gastrocnemius aponeurosis/fascia flaps, direct repair and synthetic grafts, [1, 8, 14, 27, 28, 30, 35, 47, 66, 68]. In recent years endoscopically assisted techniques have been advocated by the literature, including endoscopic transfers of the FHL-tendon [16], peroneus brevis tendon [39] and semitendinosus tendon [46] due to the lower risk of skin complications and wound infections. The choice of surgical procedure depends on the location of the rupture, the size of tendon-end diastasis, individual factors such as patient activity level and age, together with the preference and experience of the surgeon [51].

Even though many surgical techniques are described in the literature, no single technique has been shown to be superior to another. The aim of this systematic review was to analyse the current clinical evidence of two established techniques to treat chronic Achilles tendon ruptures: gastrocnemius aponeurosis flaps and semitendinosus tendon grafts as both FHL-grafts [2] and local tendon transfers [43] have been discussed in recent reviews. However, due to a high heterogenicity between the included studies, it was not deemed possible to do any statistical comparing between the two techniques.

Method and materials

Search query

The systematic search was performed on 2021–07-02, with an updated search a year later, on 2022–09-22, in three established databases: PubMed, Scopus and Cochrane Library using the search queries outlined in Table 1. The initial search query included all studies presenting the outcome of chronic Achilles tendon ruptures treated surgically. In the final stage, studies presenting outcomes of gastrocnemius aponeurosis flaps or semitendinosus tendon grafts were isolated and analysed. The inclusion criteria were all studies, descriptive and comparative, presenting results on the management of chronic Achilles tendon ruptures in adults (> 18 years) using gastrocnemius aponeurosis flap or semitendinosus tendon graft. Numerous studies also included patients surgically treated for a re-rupture using the same technique. The data on re-ruptures was excluded when presented separately. In those studies where it was not possible to separate the results, the study was still included if a majority of the included patients were treated for a chronic Achilles tendon rupture. Other exclusion criteria were (1) case-reports and case series with less than 10 patients, (2) reviews, (3) studies written in non-English languages and (4) expert opinions. The systematic review was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42022294130).

Table 1 Search query, Boolean operators and search results in the databases PubMed, Scopus, and Cochrane
Full size table

Study selection

The search was conducted by the authors and the initial search resulted in 1,340 studies, after removing duplicates, 818 studies remained. All studies were uploaded to the website Rayyan® for abstract review. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) was used to structure the filtering of studies [54]. Two authors (NN and IS) independently reviewed the abstracts of the included studies. Disagreement between the authors were settled through discussion. A total of 182 studies remained after the initial abstract review. These were all later successfully imported as full-text versions. For the full-text review, the studies were divided equally between the six authors and checked by a minimum of two authors.

After the full-text filtering, 86 studies remained. Out of these, 36 individual studies used gastrocnemius aponeurosis flaps or semitendinosus tendon grafts to treat chronic Achilles tendon ruptures and were included in the review. The inclusion and exclusion process are illustrated in Fig. 1.

Fig. 1
figure 1

PRISMA-flowchart for the inclusion of studies, The PRISMA 2020 statement [54]

Full size image

Quality assessment

To assess the methodological quality and risk of bias for the included studies the validated Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies (MINORS). MINORS is a quality assessment tool for systematic reviews first described by Slim et. al [62]. It is widely used and has a strong external validity. The studies included in this systematic review were all non-randomized and non-comparative studies. MINORS consists of twelve questions, where the last four questions are additional criteria in case of comparative studies. Each question can be scored from 0–2. A score of 0 meaning it is not reported in the study, a score of 1 meaning it is reported but inadequate, and a score of 2 meaning it is reported and adequate [62].

Result extraction

Three reviewers extracted the data using a structured extraction protocol. The extracted data was surgical technique, number of patients, mean age, duration of follow-up, outcome measures, presented results. The results analysed were patient-reported outcomes, functional outcome measures and complication rates. Any disagreement was settled through discussion. Moreover, if any author were among the authors of the original study analysed, they did not perform any result extraction or quality assessment of that study.

Results

Study selection

All the included studies were case series (Level IV) that either used a gastrocnemius aponeurosis flap or semitendinosus tendon graft to treat chronic Achilles tendon ruptures. A semitendinosus tendon graft was used in 13 studies and a gastrocnemius aponeurosis flap in 21 studies. There were two studies that used both surgical techniques. In the study by Bai et al. [4] 11 patients were treated with a gastrocnemius aponeurosis flap and 15 were treated with a semitendinosus tendon graft. The study by Gedam et al. [15] used both augmentation techniques in all patients and was therefore not part of the analysis. The extracted data from the studies is presented in Table 3. The grand total number of patients included were 763. The study by Bąkowski et al. [5] included eight additional cadavers which were excluded from this systematic review.

Quality assessment

The included studies MINORS-scores are shown in Table 2. The maximum points are 16 for non-randomized studies. The included studies generally had low quality according to MINORS, with a median of 8 out of 16 (range 2–13) for all studies.

Table 2 The points of each study according to the MINORS-score. The maximum score is 16
Full size table

Result extraction

A summary of the results of each individual study is shown in Table 3. The patients treated with gastrocnemius aponeurosis flap had a mean age of 44.5 years and were followed-up for a mean time period of 40 months. The patients treated with semitendinosus tendon grafts had a mean age and follow-up time of 44 years and 28 months, respectively. The outcome measures used in the studies were patient-reported outcome measures (ATRS [48], VAS [21], VISA-A [58], FADI [61], Tegner scale [63], and SF-36 [26]) mixed scores (AOFAS [64], Leppilahti [29, 64], Hooker [52], Arner-Lindholm [3], Rupp-score [24] and Holz-scale [12]) and clinical tests (calf circumference [64], range of motion (ROM), muscle strength/isokinetic testing/heel-rise tests, ultrasonography and Manual Muscle Testing (MMT) [10]). The most used outcome measure was AOFAS with a total of 19 unique studies. Some outcome measures were only used once: including the Holz scale, Tegner scale, FADI, Hooker, MMT, Arner-Lindholm, Rupp-score and SF-36.

Table 3 The included studies, number of patients, age, follow-up time, outcome measures, results and complications
Full size table

The mean (SD; n) postoperative ATRS was 83 (14; 6 studies) and the mean (SD; n) AOFAS was 96 (1.7; 12 studies) for patients treated with a gastrocnemius aponeurosis flap. In comparison, the mean (SD; n) ATRS and AOFAS for semitendinosus tendon grafts were similar with scores of ATRS 88 (6.9; 7 studies) and AOFAS 92 (5.6; 9 studies). However, patients treated with semitendinosus tendon grafts had lower mean (SD; n) preoperative values with ATRS 38 (11.3; 6 studies) vs. 50 (11.1; 3 studies) and AOFAS 51 (13.3; 7 studies) vs. 62 (9.0; 10 studies).

A comparison of the complications between gastrocnemius aponeurosis flaps and semitendinosus tendon grafts can be found in Table 4. The most common complication found was superficial wound infection with a total of 27 patients (3.4%), 22 (4.6%) of which were treated with gastrocnemius aponeurosis flaps and 5 (1.5%) with semitendinosus tendon grafts. In general, patients treated with gastrocnemius aponeurosis flap had more complications than patients treated with semitendinosus tendon grafts, mainly due to wound healing problems. However, patients treated with semitendinosus graft were more prone to sural nerve injury due to a smaller surgical incision. Only one re-rupture occurred in the total group of 763 patients. That patient was treated with a gastrocnemius flap.

Table 4 Overview of the complications for semitendinosus tendon grafts (ST-grafts) and gastrocnemius flaps (G-flaps)
Full size table

Discussion

The most important finding of this systematic review was that both gastrocnemius aponeurosis flap and semitendinosus graft reconstructions were found to be effective in treating chronic Achilles tendon ruptures with similar favourable patient-reported outcome scores and performances in functional tests. Only one re-rupture was reported (0.12%) in the patient group treated with a gastrocnemius aponeurosis flap and no patient in the group treated with a semitendinosus graft. However, studies of higher quality are needed to fully determine the optimal way of treating chronic Achilles tendon ruptures. All the included studies were case series without matched control groups. Additionally, the articles used a variety of different outcome measures, which limited the comparisons between studies. Lastly, even though the gastrocnemius aponeurosis flaps, and semitendinosus tendon grafts are presented as distinctive groups, both groups were heterogenic with different interpretations of the techniques.

In prior systematic reviews by Apinun et al. [2] and Hadi et al. [20], similar results have been shown with good functional patient-reported outcomes, and low re-rupture rates. The review performed by Hadi et al. identified 35 individual studies in 2013 whereas this systematic review identified a total of 86 individual publications on the same subject in 2022. The heterogenicity of outcome measures and surgical techniques, and the retrospective nature of limited cohort sizes remain. This meant that quantitative meta-analysis was deemed inappropriate. Studies including fewer than 10 patients were excluded from this systematic review. Most of these studies were case reports with one to two patients using no outcomes measures. Therefore, the exclusion of case reports did not result in any substantial data loss.

The result of the included studies indicate that patients treated with a gastrocnemius flap are more prone to complications than patients treated with semitendinosus tendon graft. Due to the heterogenicity, no significant difference could be determined, however. Depending on the surgical technique a different pattern of complications occurred. Semitendinosus tendon grafts uses an autologous transplantation with risk of complications related to the hamstring donor site or sural nerve injury due to the location and the smaller size of the surgical incisions. Gastrocnemius flaps uses a turn-down flap or a free-flap from the aponeurosis with larger surgical wounds leading to an increased risk of infections and wound healing problems [42].

The MINORS assessment generally resulted in a low-quality with scores with a median of 8 out of 16. Moreover, the studies included in this review frequently used AOFAS as their main patient-reported outcome. It is known that this outcome measure is not validated for Achilles tendon ruptures. Instead, a patient-reported outcome such as ATRS could be used. This patient-reported outcome measure is also not validated for chronic Achilles tendon ruptures, but it is validated for acute Achilles tendon ruptures. In the future, research of chronic Achilles tendon ruptures would benefit from a patient-reported outcome measure that is validated for chronic ruptures, as that would allow for a clearer comparison between operating methods and outcome.

The exclusions based on the number of patients and the language of the studies might have affected the results of this review. This review excluded all non-English studies and all studies with less than 10 patients. The exclusion criteria removed 108 studies due to language and 47 studies due to a small cohort size. The exclusion of studies in non-English language facilitated data extraction by avoiding outcome heterogeneity between studies, thus improving quality. The number of articles excluded based on sample size were large in number but were usually singular case reports without any outcome measures. Similarly, varying outcomes measures may have made comparisons between studies even harder.

Following this systematic review, the authors recommendation is to individualise the treatment of chronic Achilles tendon ruptures depending on factors such as functional demands, comorbidities, tendon gap size, and the general experience of the orthopaedic surgeon treating the patient. The use of a gastrocnemius aponeurosis flap in tendon ruptures with a gap that is less than 5 cm is regarded as efficient [12, 47]. In tendon ruptures with larger defects (> 5 cm) a semitendinosus tendon graft will bridge the defect [37, 60]. Other alternatives include flexor hallucis longus graft [53, 56] and peroneus tendon graft [40].

Conclusion

In conclusion, surgical reconstruction with both semitendinosus tendon grafts, and gastrocnemius aponeurosis flaps are considered effective in treating chronic Achilles tendon ruptures with good patient-reported outcomes and few re-ruptures. The complication profiles are different between the two techniques with more postoperative infections and wound healing complications in patients treated with a gastrocnemius aponeurosis flap and more sural nerve injuries and donor site weakness in patients treated with a semitendinosus graft. There is a continued need for more prospective randomized controlled trials and a need for an established outcome measure for chronic Achilles tendon ruptures to fully evaluate the effectiveness of different reconstructive techniques in the treatment of chronic Achilles tendon ruptures.

Availability of data and materials

The datasets used and/or analysed during the current study available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

References

  1. Abraham E, Pankovich AM. Neglected rupture of the Achilles tendon. Treatment by VY tendinous flap. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1975;57:253–5.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Apinun J, Jenvorapoj S, Arirachakaran A, Kongtharvonskul J. Clinical outcomes of chronic Achilles tendon rupture treated with flexor hallucis longus grafting and flexor hallucis longus grafting plus additional augmentation: a meta-analysis. Foot Ankle Surg. 2020;26:717–22.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Arner O, Lindholm A. Subcutaneous rupture of the Achilles tendon; a study of 92 cases. Acta Chir Scand Suppl. 1959;116:1–51.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Bai L, Guan S, You T, Zhang W, Chen P. Comparison of gastrocnemius turn flap and hamstring graft for the treatment of Kuwada type 3 chronic ruptures of the Achilles tendon: a Retrospective Study. Orthop J Sports Med. 2019;7:2325967119887673.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  5. Bąkowski P, Ciemniewska-Gorzela K, Talaśka K, Górecki J, Wojtkowiak D, Kerkhoffs G, et al. Minimally invasive reconstruction technique for chronic Achilles tendon tears allows rapid return to walking and leads to good functional recovery. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2020;28:305–11.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Bansal N, Dev P, Tiwari P, Jain A. Clinical Evaluation of a Minimally Invasive Technique Using a Free Semitendinosus Tendon Graft for Reconstruction of a Chronic Achilles Tendon Tear with Wide Gap. Techniques in Orthopaedics. 2021.

  7. Barnes MJ, Hardy AE. Delayed reconstruction of the calcaneal tendon. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1986;68:121–4.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Carden DG, Noble J, Chalmers J, Lunn P, Ellis J. Rupture of the calcaneal tendon. The early and late management. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1987;69:416–20.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Cetti R, Junge J, Vyberg M. Spontaneous rupture of the Achilles tendon is preceded by widespread and bilateral tendon damage and ipsilateral inflammation: a clinical and histopathologic study of 60 patients. Acta Orthop Scand. 2003;74:78–84.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Dumbre Patil SS, Dumbre Patil VS, Basa VR, Dombale AB. Semitendinosus Tendon Autograft for Reconstruction of Large Defects in Chronic Achilles Tendon Ruptures. Foot Ankle Int. 2014;35:699–705.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. El Shazly O, Abou El Soud MM, El Mikkawy DM, El Ganzoury I, Ibrahim AM. Endoscopic-assisted achilles tendon reconstruction with free hamstring tendon autograft for chronic rupture of achilles tendon: clinical and isokinetic evaluation. Arthroscopy. 2014;30:622–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. El Shewy MT, El Barbary HM, Abdel-Ghani H. Repair of chronic rupture of the achilles tendon using 2 intratendinous flaps from the proximal gastrocnemius-soleus complex. Am J Sports Med. 2009;37:1570–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Elgohary HEA, Elmoghazy NA, Abd Ellatif MS. Combined flexor hallucis longus tendon transfer and gastrocnemius recession for reconstruction of gapped chronic achilles tendon ruptures. Injury. 2016;47:2833–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Gabel S, Manoli A 2nd. Neglected rupture of the Achilles tendon. Foot Ankle Int. 1994;15:512–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Gedam PN, Rushnaiwala FM. Endoscopy-Assisted Achilles Tendon Reconstruction With a Central Turndown Flap and Semitendinosus Augmentation. Foot Ankle Int. 2016;37:1333–42.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Gonçalves S, Caetano R, Corte-Real N. Salvage Flexor Hallucis Longus Transfer for a Failed Achilles Repair: Endoscopic Technique. Arthrosc Tech. 2015;4:e411-416.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  17. Gross CE, Nunley JA 2nd. Acute Achilles Tendon Ruptures. Foot Ankle Int. 2016;37:233–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Guclu B, Basat HC, Yildirim T, Bozduman O, Us AK. Long-term results of chronic Achilles tendon ruptures repaired With V-Y Tendon Plasty and Fascia Turndown. Foot Ankle Int. 2016;37:737–42.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Gunaratne R, Chong YC, Heng Y, Hahn J, Lek J, Randazzo A, et al. Chronic Achilles tendon rupture: a novel modification of surgical technique described by El Shewy. ANZ J Surg. 2021;91:1447–50.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Hadi M, Young J, Cooper L, Costa M, Maffulli N. Surgical management of chronic ruptures of the Achilles tendon remains unclear: a systematic review of the management options. Br Med Bull. 2013;108:95–114.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Haefeli M, Elfering A. Pain assessment. Eur Spine J. 2006;15:S17–24.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Jain M, Tripathy SK, Behera S, Das SS, Rana R, Gantaguru A. Functional outcome of gastrocnemius advancement flap augmented with short flexor hallucis longus tendon transfer in chronic Achilles tear. Foot (Edinb). 2020;45:101704.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Kaul R, Prasad M, Iqbal M. Reconstruction of neglected Tendo-Achilles tears using the technique of Gastrocnemius-Soleus turndown graft: a case series. Med J Dr DY Patil Vidyapeeth. 2020;13:672–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Kerkhoffs GM, Struijs PA, Raaymakers EL, Marti RK. Functional treatment after surgical repair of acute Achilles tendon rupture: wrap vs walking cast. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2002;122:102–5.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Khiami F, Di Schino M, Sariali E, Cao D, Rolland E, Catonné Y. Treatment of chronic Achilles tendon rupture by shortening suture and free sural triceps aponeurosis graft. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res. 2013;99:585–91.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Koh D, Lim J, Chen JY, Singh IR, Koo K. Flexor hallucis longus transfer versus turndown flaps augmented with flexor hallucis longus transfer in the repair of chronic Achilles tendon rupture. Foot Ankle Surg. 2019;25:221–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Kosanović M, Brilej D. Chronic rupture of Achilles tendon: is the percutaneous suture technique effective? Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2008;128:211–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Kraeutler MJ, Purcell JM, Hunt KJ. Chronic Achilles tendon ruptures. Foot Ankle Int. 2017;38:921–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Leppilahti J, Forsman K, Puranen J, Orava S. Outcome and prognostic factors of Achilles rupture repair using a new scoring method. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1998;346:152–61.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Leslie HD, Edwards WH. Neglected ruptures of the Achilles tendon. Foot Ankle Clin. 2005;10:357–70.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Li Y, Jiang Y, Tao T, Pan Z, Zhang K, Gui J. Endoscopic reconstruction for chronic Achilles tendon ruptures using a hamstring tendon autograft. J Orthop Sci. 2020. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jos.2020.09.004

  32. Lin YJ, Duan XJ, Yang L. V-Y Tendon plasty for reconstruction of chronic Achilles tendon rupture: a Medium-term and Long-term Follow-up. Orthop Surg. 2019;11:109–16.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  33. Lins C, Ninomya AF, Bittar CK, de Carvalho AE Jr, Cliquet A Jr. Kinetic and kinematic evaluation of the ankle joint after achilles tendon reconstruction with free semitendinosus tendon graft: preliminary results. Artif Organs. 2013;37:291–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Maffulli N. The clinical diagnosis of subcutaneous tear of the Achilles tendon. A prospective study in 174 patients. Am J Sports Med. 1998;26:266–70.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Maffulli N, Ajis A. Management of chronic ruptures of the Achilles tendon. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2008;90:1348–60.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Maffulli N, Del Buono A, Loppini M, Denaro V. Ipsilateral free semitendinosus tendon graft with interference screw fixation for minimally invasive reconstruction of chronic tears of the Achilles tendon. Oper Orthop Traumatol. 2014;26:513–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Maffulli N, Del Buono A, Spiezia F, Maffulli GD, Longo UG, Denaro V. Less-invasive semitendinosus tendon graft augmentation for the reconstruction of chronic tears of the Achilles tendon. Am J Sports Med. 2013;41:865–71.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Maffulli N, Oliva F, Maffulli GD, Buono AD, Gougoulias N. Surgical management of chronic Achilles tendon ruptures using less invasive techniques. Foot Ankle Surg. 2018;24:164–70.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Maffulli N, Spiezia F, Longo UG, Denaro V. Less-invasive reconstruction of chronic achilles tendon ruptures using a peroneus brevis tendon transfer. Am J Sports Med. 2010;38:2304–12.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Maffulli N, Spiezia F, Pintore E, Longo UG, Testa V, Capasso G, et al. Peroneus brevis tendon transfer for reconstruction of chronic tears of the Achilles tendon: a long-term follow-up study. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2012;94:901–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Maffulli N, Via AG, Oliva F. Chronic Achilles Tendon Disorders: Tendinopathy and Chronic Rupture. Clin Sports Med. 2015;34:607–24.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Maffulli N, Via AG, Oliva F. Chronic Achilles Tendon Rupture. Open Orthop J. 2017;11:660–9.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  43. Maffulli N, Ziello S, Maisto G, Migliorini F, Oliva F. Local tendon transfers for chronic ruptures of the Achilles Tendon: a systematic review. J Clin Med. 2023;12:707.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  44. Massoud EIE. Tension regulation at the suture lines for repair of neglected Achilles Tendon Laceration. Foot Ankle Int. 2017;38:304–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Mulier T, Pienaar H, Dereymaeker G, Reynders P, Broos P. The management of chronic Achilles tendon ruptures: Gastrocnemius turn down flap with or without flexor Hallucis longus transfer. Foot Ankle Surg. 2003;9:151–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Nilsson N, Gunnarsson B, Carmont MR, Brorsson A, Karlsson J, Nilsson Helander K. Endoscopically assisted reconstruction of chronic Achilles tendon ruptures and re-ruptures using a semitendinosus autograft is a viable alternative to pre-existing techniques. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2022;30:2477–84.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  47. Nilsson-Helander K, Sward L, Silbernagel KG, Thomee R, Eriksson BI, Karlsson J. A new surgical method to treat chronic ruptures and reruptures of the Achilles tendon. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2008;16:614–20.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Nilsson-Helander K, Thomee R, Silbernagel KG, Thomee P, Faxen E, Eriksson BI, et al. The Achilles tendon Total Rupture Score (ATRS): development and validation. Am J Sports Med. 2007;35:421–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Nordenholm A, Nilsson N, Senorski EH, Helander KN, Westin O, Olsson N. Patients with chronic Achilles tendon rupture have persistent limitations in patient-reported function and calf muscle function one year after surgical treatment - a case series. J Exp Orthop. 2022;9:15.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  50. Nordenholm A, Senorski EH, Westin O, Nilsson Helander K, Moller M, Karlsson J, et al. Surgical treatment of chronic Achilles tendon rupture results in improved gait biomechanics. J Orthop Surg Res. 2022;17:67.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  51. Oliva F, Bernardi G, De Luna V, Pasquale F, Gasparini M, Emanuela M, et al. IS Mu. LT Achilles tendon ruptures guidelines. MLTJ Muscles Ligaments Tendons J. 2018;3:310–63.

    Google Scholar 

  52. Ozan F, Dogar F, Gurbuz K, Ekinci Y, Koyuncu S, Sekban H. Chronic achilles tendon rupture reconstruction using the Lindholm Method and the Vulpius Method. J Clin Med Res. 2017;9:573–8.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  53. Ozer H, Ergisi Y, Harput G, Senol MS, Baltaci G. Short-term results of flexor Hallucis longus transfer in delayed and neglected Achilles Tendon Repair. J Foot Ankle Surg. 2018;57:1042–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Page MJ, McKenzie JE, Bossuyt PM, Boutron I, Hoffmann TC, Mulrow CD, et al. The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ. 2021;372:n71.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  55. Pavan Kumar A, Shashikiran R, Raghuram C. A novel modification of Bosworth’s technique to repair zone I Achilles tendon ruptures. J Orthop Traumatol. 2013;14:59–65.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  56. Pendse A, Kankate R. Reconstruction of chronic achilles tendon ruptures in elderly patients, with vascularized flexor hallucis longus tendon transfer using single incision technique. Acta Orthop Belg. 2019;85:137–43.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Raju S, Singhi PK, Somashekar V, Ajari A, Chidambaram M. Long-Term Outcomes of Gastrocnemius V-Y Plasty Gastrosoleus Fascial Turndown Flap for Chronic Tendo-achilles Injuries with Complex Gap (Kuwada Type IV Injuries). Indian J Orthop. 2022;56:421–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  58. Robinson JM, Cook JL, Purdam C, Visentini PJ, Ross J, Maffulli N, et al. The VISA-A questionnaire: a valid and reliable index of the clinical severity of Achilles tendinopathy. Br J Sports Med. 2001;35:335.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  59. Sadek AF, Fouly EH, Laklok MA, Amin MF. Functional and MRI follow-up after reconstruction of chronic ruptures of the Achilles tendon Myerson type III using the triple-loop plantaris tendon wrapped with central turndown flap: a case series. J Orthop Surg Res. 2015;10:109.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  60. Sarzaeem MM, Lemraski MM, Safdari F. Chronic Achilles tendon rupture reconstruction using a free semitendinosus tendon graft transfer. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2012;20:1386–91.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  61. Seker A, Kara A, Armagan R, Oc Y, Varol A, Sezer HB. Reconstruction of neglected achilles tendon ruptures with gastrocnemius flaps: excellent results in long-term follow-up. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2016;136:1417–23.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  62. Slim K, Nini E, Forestier D, Kwiatkowski F, Panis Y, Chipponi J. Methodological index for non-randomized studies (minors): development and validation of a new instrument. ANZ J Surg. 2003;73:712–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  63. Song YJ, Chen G, Jia SH, Xu WB, Hua YH. Good outcomes at mid-term following the reconstruction of chronic Achilles tendon rupture with semitendinosus allograft. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2020;28:1619–24.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  64. Spennacchio P, Vascellari A, Cucchi D, Canata GL, Randelli P. Outcome evaluation after Achilles tendon ruptures. A review of the literature. Joints. 2016;4:52–61.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  65. Takao M, Ochi M, Naito K, Uchio Y, Matsusaki M, Oae K. Repair of neglected Achilles tendon rupture using gastrocnemius fascial flaps. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2003;123:471–4.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  66. Turco VJ, Spinella AJ. Achilles tendon ruptures–peroneus brevis transfer. Foot Ankle. 1987;7:253–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  67. van der Werken C, Marti RK. Operative repair of ruptured achilles tendon and functional after-treatment--II. Delayed rupture. Neth J Surg. 1983;35:65–8.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  68. Wapner KL, Hecht PJ, Mills RH Jr. Reconstruction of neglected Achilles tendon injury. Orthop Clin North Am. 1995;26:249–63.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  69. Yassin M, Gupta V, Martins A, Mahadevan D, Bhatia M. Patient reported outcomes and satisfaction following single incision Flexor Hallucis Longus (FHL) augmentation for chronic Achilles tendon pathologies. J Clin Orthop Trauma. 2021;23:101650.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

Open access funding provided by University of Gothenburg. No external funding was received.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Orthopaedics, Institute of Clinical Sciences at Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden

    Niklas Nilsson, Immanuel Stensöta, Katarina Nilsson Helander, Annelie Brorsson, Michael R. Carmont & Sebastian Concaro

  2. Department of Orthopaedics, Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Göteborgsvägen 31, Mölndal, 431 80, Sweden

    Niklas Nilsson, Immanuel Stensöta, Katarina Nilsson Helander & Sebastian Concaro

  3. IFK Kliniken Rehab, Gothenburg, Sweden

    Annelie Brorsson

  4. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Princess Royal Hospital, Shrewsbury and Telford Hospital NHS Trust, Shropshire, UK

    Michael R. Carmont

Authors
  1. Niklas Nilsson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Immanuel Stensöta
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Katarina Nilsson Helander
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Annelie Brorsson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Michael R. Carmont
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Sebastian Concaro
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

All authors took part in the development of the study design. NN and IS reviewed the abstracts in Rayyan®. All authors performed the full-text filtering, result extraction and quality assessment. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Niklas Nilsson.

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate

Not applicable.

Consent of publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Nilsson, N., Stensöta, I., Nilsson Helander, K. et al. Both gastrocnemius aponeurosis flaps and semitendinosus tendon grafts are effective in the treatment of chronic Achilles tendon ruptures – a systematic review. BMC Musculoskelet Disord 24, 951 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12891-023-07064-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12891-023-07064-8

Keywords

BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders

ISSN: 1471-2474

Contact us