Should long head of biceps tenodesis or tenotomy be routinely performed in arthroscopic rotator cuff repairs?

Long head of the biceps tendon plays a role in stress absorption and humeral head restriction during the late cocking and deceleration phases of overhead throwing: a finite element study

BACKGROUND

Emerging evidence suggests that the long head of the biceps (LHBT) may play a role in stabilizing the glenohumeral joint, and this has led to controversy around the efficacy of biceps tenotomy for superior labral anterior and posterior (SLAP) lesions. Therefore, the aim of this finite element analysis (FEA) study was to determine the stress absorption and humeral head translation restriction effects of the LHBT within the glenohumeral joint during the late cocking and deceleration phases of overhead throwing with a view to resolving the controversy around tenotomy.

METHODS

Eight FEA models were created using computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging data from normal glenohumeral joints. The models represented 4 LHBT conditions: uninjured, subpectoral tenodesis, tenotomy, and type II SLAP lesions. The late cocking and deceleration phases of the overhead throwing were simulated for each model. The impacts of the 4 LHBT conditions on glenohumeral joint stress absorption and humeral head displacement restriction were studied based on 1) stress and related distributions on the cartilage, labrum, capsule, and LHBT; and 2) humeral head translation variation.

RESULTS

The FEA analysis showed that the magnitude of the contact stress on the articular cartilage, labrum, and capsule was the lowest in the uninjured models, followed by the subpectoral tenodesis, tenotomy, and type II SLAP lesion models. Humeral head translation was the most restricted in the subpectoral tenodesis models, followed by the tenotomy and type II SLAP lesion models.

CONCLUSION

FEA demonstrated that the LHBT plays a significant role in stress absorption and displacement restriction in the late cocking and deceleration phases of overhead throwing. Subpectoral tenodesis of the LHBT exhibited lesser amount of stress and humeral head translation than those of tenotomy, thereby making it a better option for patients who engage in overhead throwing.

Mild Biceps Tendonitis May Be Managed Nonoperatively During Shoulder Arthroscopy

Purpose

The purposes of this study were to determine whether patients with mild biceps tendonitis required revision surgery after the biceps tendon was not surgically treated, while addressing concomitant pathology, and to evaluate whether preoperative groove pain affected patient-reported outcomes.

Methods

Patients who underwent shoulder arthroscopy between 2015 and 2018 by a single surgeon for rotator cuff pathology, debridement, and distal clavicular excision (DCE), with or without subacromial decompression (SAD), and where the biceps tendon was not surgically addressed were retrospectively identified. Inclusion criteria were mild LS (<50% hyperemic appearing biceps tendon arthroscopically), and a minimum 2-year follow-up. The primary outcome measure was the incidence of revision surgery. Secondary outcomes included American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) score, simple shoulder test (SST), pain level, and satisfaction scores. Two sample t-tests compared postoperative patient-reported outcomes based on the presence or absence of preoperative bicipital groove tenderness.

Results

Sixty-four of 69 eligible subjects (93%) were evaluated at a minimum of 2 years postoperatively. One out of 64 subjects underwent revision to perform a biceps tenodesis. Overall, patients had high patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) postoperatively. Ninety-seven percent of patients reported they would have the surgery again. The presence of preoperative bicipital groove tenderness had no effect on ASES (P = .62), SST (P = .83) scores, and postoperative pain (P = .65). Patients without bicipital groove pain had average respective ASES and SST scores of 93.70 ± 11.84 and 10.66 ± 2.47; those with bicipital groove pain averaged 92.00 ± 15.31 and 10.78 ± 1.87. There was no significant difference in overall satisfaction scores between patients with groove pain (9.42 ± 1.40) and those without (9.46 ± 1.38; P = .92).

Conclusions

Patients with mild biceps tendonitis showed favorable outcomes with low revision rates and high patient satisfaction when the biceps tendon was not surgically addressed when the primary shoulder pathology was treated during arthroscopy, independent of preoperative groove pain.

Level of Evidence

Level III, retrospective cohort study.

The long head of biceps at the shoulder: a scoping review

BACKGROUND

This review aimed to explore the available literature to update our understanding of the long head of biceps (LHB) at the shoulder. Synthesise our findings to identify emergent themes and knowledge gaps to inform future research and management directions.

METHODS

PubMed, Embase, Cinahl, SportDiscus, CENTRAL, and Web of Science were searched from inception to 31st December 2021. Articles were included if they referenced adult participants > 18 years of age and were written in English.

RESULTS

214 articles were included in the final analysis, and results were categorised into six emergent themes: (1) Anatomy - Normal anatomical variation of the biceps from aberrant origins, third and fourth accessory heads, and an absence of the LHB tendon (LHBT) are not necessarily benign, with shoulder pain and instability a commonly reported theme. (2) Function - Bicep's role in glenohumeral elevation and stability in healthy shoulders is minimal. In contrast, LHB has a more significant role in shoulder stability and humeral head depression in subjects with rotator cuff failure or an absent LHBT. (3) Pathology - There is an association between LHB tendinopathy, rotator cuff disease, LHBT instability and occult rotator cuff tears. Early recruitment and hyperactivity of the LHB in subjects with symptomatic rotator cuff tears and instability suggest a potential compensatory role. (4) Assessment - The limited diagnostic utility of special orthopaedic tests in assessing LHBT pathology was a consistent theme. The utility of magnetic resonance imaging and ultrasound to identify full-thickness tendon tears and instability of the LHBT was moderate to high. However, the utility of clinical tests and imaging may be underestimated due to arthroscopy's limitations in fully visualising the proximal LHBT. (5) Non-Surgical Management - Ultrasound-guided injections into the biceps sheath show greater accuracy and patient outcomes than blinded injections; however, the entry of injectate into the intraarticular glenohumeral joint may have unwanted complications. (6) Surgical management - For the surgical management of biceps pathology with or without rotator cuff pathology, both biceps tenodesis and tenotomy report similar improvements in pain without any significant adverse effect on strength or function. Tenodesis favoured higher overall constant scores and a lower incidence of Popeye deformity and cramping arm pain, with tenotomy trending to be more cost and time effective. For patients with a healthy LHBT, rotator cuff repair with adjunctive tenodesis or tenotomy fails to provide additional clinical improvements compared to rotator cuff repair in isolation.

CONCLUSIONS

The scoping review highlights the variability of biceps anatomy, which is not necessarily benign and suggests a minimal role of the LHB in shoulder elevation and stability in healthy individuals. In contrast, individuals with rotator cuff tears experience proximal humeral migration and demonstrate hyperactivity of the LHB, suggesting a potential compensation role. The observed prevalence of LHBT pathology with rotator cuff tears is well established; however, the cause-and-effect relationship between LHBT pathology and rotator cuff disease is undetermined. The diagnostic utility of clinical tests and imaging to exclude LHBT pathology may be understated due to the limitations of arthroscopy to visualise the proximal LHBT fully. Rehabilitation programs for the LHB are understudied. Similar post-surgical clinical outcomes are observed for tenodesis and tenotomy for biceps and rotator cuff-related shoulder pain. Subjects undergoing biceps tenodesis are less likely to have cramping arm pain and a Popeye deformity than patients undergoing biceps tenotomy. The significance of routine surgical removal of the LHBT and sequelae on rotator cuff tear progression to failure and long-term shoulder function is unknown, and further research is required.

PRE-REGISTRATION

OSF: https://osf.io/erh9m.

Arthroscopic rotator cuff repair results in similar postoperative functional outcomes in patients with only rotator cuff tears and those with concomitant cervical radiculopathy

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to compare postoperative functional outcomes after arthroscopic rotator cuff repair in patients with only rotator cuff tears versus those with concomitant cervical radiculopathy.

METHODS

A retrospective study of patients who underwent unilateral rotator cuff repair at a tertiary hospital between 2012 and 2016 was conducted. Patients included in the study were divided into two groups: (1) those with rotator cuff tears only (RC only) and (2) those with concomitant cervical radiculopathy (RC + radiculopathy). Cervical radiculopathy was treated non-surgically in these patients. Oxford Shoulder Score (OSS), Constant Shoulder Score (CSS), University of California at Los Angeles Shoulder Score (UCLASS) and Visual Analog Scale (VAS) pain score were measured for each patient preoperatively and at 3, 6, 12, and 24 months postoperatively.

RESULTS

As compared to the RC-only group (n = 324), the RC + radiculopathy group (n = 33) had significantly poorer OSS (p = 0.001), CSS (p = 0.017) and UCLASS (p = 0.009) functional scores preoperatively. On follow-up, there were no significant differences in functional outcomes between the groups at 3, 6, 12 and 24 months postoperatively for OSS, CSS, UCLASS and VAS pain scores, with the exception of CSS which was higher in the RC-only group at 6 months (p = 0.007). The absolute change and number of patients that attained minimum clinically important difference (MCID) for OSS, CSS and UCLASS at 12- and 24-month follow-ups were also comparable between the groups.

CONCLUSION

Patients with rotator cuff tears and concomitant cervical radiculopathy achieve similar postoperative functional outcomes to those with only rotator cuff tears, after arthroscopic rotator cuff repair.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III.

Technique of Arthroscopic Suprapectoral Tenodesis of the Long Head of the Biceps With Interference Screw

Tenodesis and tenotomy are the main surgical options to treat different pathologies of the long head of the biceps tendon. Maintaining the functionality of the tendon during tenodesis makes it more preferable surgical option. The consensus on the most advanced tenodesis technique has not been reached. The article presents the arthroscopic all-inside technique of suprapectoral tenodesis of the biceps tendon using the technique of "zone marking" with 2 spinal needles or pins.

The UCLA Shoulder Score Is a Better Predictor of Treatment Success Than the Constant and Oxford Shoulder Scores After Arthroscopic Rotator Cuff Repair: A 2-Year Follow-Up Study

Purpose

The aim of this study was to determine the correlation between functional outcome scores and treatment success after arthroscopic rotator cuff repair.

Methods

We conducted a retrospective cohort study of patients who underwent unilateral rotator cuff repair at a tertiary hospital between 2010 and 2015. University of California at Los Angeles Shoulder Score (UCLASS), Constant Shoulder Score (CSS), and Oxford Shoulder Score (OSS) were measured before and at 6, 12, and 24 months after surgery. Patients were divided into 2 groups at each follow-up: (1) those with successful treatment and (2) those with unsuccessful treatment. Treatment success was defined as simultaneous fulfilment of 3 criteria: clinically significant improvement in pain, expectations for surgery met, and patient satisfied with surgery.

Results

A total of 214 subjects met the inclusion criteria. UCLASS was a consistent significant predictor of treatment success at 6 months (odds ratio [OR] 1.192, P = .005, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.054-1.348), 12 months (OR 1.274, P < .001, 95% CI 1.153-1.406), and 24 months (OR 1.266, P < .001, 95% CI 1.162-1.380). Lower preoperative CSS was significant in predicting treatment success at 6 months (OR 0.952, P = .001, 95% CI 0.926-0.979), while larger tear size was significant in predicting treatment success at 24 months (OR 1.773, P = .043, 95% CI 1.019-3.083).

Conclusion

UCLASS is a better tool for predicting treatment success than CSS and OSS in patients undergoing arthroscopic rotator cuff repair, up to a minimum of 24 months’ follow-up. A holistic assessment of shoulder function, taking into account both subjective and objective evaluation of function, as well as patient-reported satisfaction, is important in determining treatment success after arthroscopic rotator cuff repair.

Level of Evidence

III, retrospective comparative study.