Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 176
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once
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 $1811.2 9 ± $169.47, p < .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 = .67). The only difference in demographics between the groups was that the single anchor group had a higher percentage of female patients (p = .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.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1053/j.jfas.2023.01.001 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!