Introduction

FHL transfer for management of chronic Achilles' tendon ruptures is done both open and endoscopically. But there are no published studies comparing open and endoscopic results. Our study aims to compare them and determine the suitability of these methods.

Materials and methods

Fourteen patients were treated endoscopically while 26 with an open technique. Of the 26, fourteen had an open Achilles tendon repair and FHL transfer while 12 has only open FHL transfer. All the endoscopic patients had only an FHL transfer.

We compared demographics, complications of the procedure, recovery times, return to work and strength after 1 year. We noted ATRS at 6 months and 1 year for all three groups.

We also conducted an MRI scan of three patients each of the three groups to determine the state of Achilles tendon and FHL tendon after 1 year of surgery.

Results

There were similar complication rates for both the only FHL groups but the open FHL + Achilles' repair had more complications both for wound complications and saphenous neuropraxia. The recovery time, return to work and ATRS at 6 months was better for the endoscopic group as compared to both open groups. The strength and ATRS at 1 year were similar for all three groups.

Conclusion

Endoscopic FHL transfer is safe and provides earlier return to work and better 6 months patient satisfaction then the open method. It also has less post op complications than open FHL + Achilles tendon repair, while maintains the same strength after 1 year.