Commentary In recent years, there seems to be a trend toward performing large numbers of gastrocnemius recessions for a variety of pathological conditions of the foot and ankle. Whether it be as part of a complex flat or cavus foot reconstruction or to improve dorsiflexion, to offload forefoot pressures when treating diabetic ulcers, or, in the case of this paper, to decrease tension across the Achilles to treat tendinopathy, there is no doubt that the gastrocnemius recession has emerged as a vital tool in the armamentarium of the foot and ankle surgeon. While there are several case series that demonstrate promising results with regard to pain relief after gastrocnemius recession for Achilles tendinopathy1,2, the literature has not been as defined regarding the effect on plantar-flexion strength postoperatively3,4. Some of these limitations include small sample size, retrospective study designs with no preoperative strength-testing for comparison, and gastrocnemius recession procedures performed in conjunction with other major reconstructive procedures, making it difficult to determine what effect the recession would have in isolation. The present study does an admirable job of quantifying the pain relief, strength, and function following a gastrocnemius recession. The results are very encouraging with regard to reducing pain and improving patient-reported satisfaction. The results of strength-testing and self-reported sports function may be a little less promising; however, this comes as no surprise. We believe that this procedure is so effective because by lengthening the gastrocnemius, the muscle is weakened. In the case of tendinopathy, this muscle-weakening reduces the stress across the degenerative portion of the tendon, and with other pathological processes, it reduces the deforming force of the gastrocnemius-soleus complex. The decrease in calf circumference postoperatively seems to support this assumption. The authors also addressed the small sample size, but they did not separate the cases with insertional and midsubstance disease. We believe that it may be beneficial to look at these entities separately, as they are distinct clinical problems that may respond differently to an isolated recession. This current study certainly supports the use of gastrocnemius recession to relieve pain associated with Achilles tendinopathy. However, patients should be counseled that they might still have difficulty with high-impact and sporting activities postoperatively. These authors should be commended for this analysis of outcomes following a gastrocnemius recession for the treatment of Achilles tendinopathy, yet we should exercise some caution when interpreting their results. As they point out in the discussion section, it is difficult to interpret the strength data, as they did not have preoperative isokinetic strength measures, and it is possible that the patients with tendinopathy were stronger than the patients in the control group preoperatively. As the clinical indications for performing gastrocnemius recession continue to expand, it will be important to continue to look critically at the subjective and objective outcome data. Myotendinous recession has been used successfully to treat spasticity and contractures in the pediatric population as well as to increase motion by reducing the contractile force of the spastic muscle. We feel that the gastrocnemius recession is no different. Perhaps the perceived improvement in strength may come from removing both the pain and the inhibition that it causes by correcting the underlying pathological process, whether it be a painful foot deformity, ankle arthritis, or, in this study, tendinopathy. Nonetheless, gastrocnemius recession is here to stay, and we will continue to incorporate this procedure into our clinical practice, relying on its ability to weaken the gastrocnemius muscle to achieve the desired clinical result.
Read full abstract