Proximal Biceps Tendon: Injuries and Management

Biomechanical evaluation of physical examination tests for rotator cuff tears: a computer simulation study

BACKGROUND

Numerous physical diagnostic shoulder tests have been established to determine the presence of rotator cuff tears and to identify the affected muscles. However, reported sensitivities and specificities of these tests vary strongly. The aim of this study was to identify diagnostic postures that are biomechanically most sensitive in identifying rotator cuff lesions and compensation mechanisms.

METHODS

A musculoskeletal modeling study investigating muscle activity in healthy shoulders as well as in shoulders with anterior, superior, and posterosuperior rotator cuff tear patterns, was conducted. Muscle moment arms and muscle synergism for the Lift-off and Bear Hug tests, Jobe and Full-can tests, and Infraspinatus and Hornblower tests were compared for healthy and pathological models.

RESULTS

In a healthy model the Lift-off test showed significantly higher subscapularis activity compared to the Bear Hug test (P < .001). Teres minor and infraspinatus activity were threefold and twofold higher, in the Hornblower than the Infraspinatus test, respectively. In superior tests, supraspinatus activity was more than twofold lower than lateral deltoid activity and synergistic activity increase was smallest (Δ 1%-3% in deltoid). Activity increase was highest in posterosuperior tests for the teres minor with 66.4% activity increase in the Infraspinatus test (P < .001) and 81.3% increase in the Hornblower test (P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

The Lift-off test was significantly more sensitive in detecting subscapularis tears and the Hornblower test was more effective in assessing teres minor integrity in posterosuperior tears. Both, Jobe and Full-can tests demonstrated low biomechanical sensitivity in the detection of superior rotator cuff tears.

Comparable and Improved Clinical Outcomes, Pain Relief, Return to Sport, and Low Popeye Deformity Rates in Inlay Versus Onlay Open Subpectoral Biceps Tenodesis: A Systematic Review

PURPOSE

To directly compare clinical outcomes, including failure rates, incidence of Popeye deformity, and return to sport (RTS)/activity between inlay and onlay fixation techniques specifically for open subpectoral biceps tenodesis.

METHODS

A systematic search of PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases was conducted for studies published between 2014 and 2024. Inclusion criteria consisted of Level I to IV studies in English, reporting clinical outcomes for open subpectoral biceps tenodesis with at least a 2-year follow-up. Data on patient-reported outcome measures, RTS, Popeye deformity, and failure rates were extracted. Risk of bias was assessed using the Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies criteria. Statistical analysis was performed to evaluate heterogeneity, and clinical outcomes between fixation techniques were compared using qualitative analysis and 95% confidence intervals.

RESULTS

Fourteen studies with a total of 498 patients (347 in the inlay group, 151 in the onlay group) were included. Postoperative American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons scores ranged from 78.6 to 95.8, visual analog scale pain scores from 0.25 to 2.6, and Constant-Murley scores from 26.7 to 91.8, with no differences noted between inlay and onlay techniques across these measures on qualitative assessment. RTS rates were similarly comparable, ranging from 62% to 93% across all studies. The incidence of Popeye deformity was low in both groups, ranging from 0% to 7.7% for inlay fixation and from 0% to 6.7% for onlay fixation, with no qualitative differences observed. Heterogeneity in outcomes was attributed to variations in study design and patient populations.

CONCLUSIONS

Both inlay and onlay fixation for open subpectoral biceps tenodesis showed comparable clinical outcomes, similar pain relief, and low rates of Popeye deformity. RTS rates were consistently high across both techniques. The choice of fixation method did not significantly impact the overall results, suggesting that either technique can be used effectively based on surgeon and patient preferences.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV, systematic review of Level I to IV studies.

Polynucleotides High Purification Technology (PN HPTTM) Injection Improves Pain Status and Functional Impairment in Hip and Shoulder Tendinitis

Background/Objectives: Tendinopathy is the preferred term to describe various tendon pathologies, including paratendinitis, tendinitis, and tendinosis, in the absence of histopathological evidence in biopsy specimens. The management of tendinopathies is challenging; rest, physiotherapy (such as eccentric training), injections, shock waves, orthotics, medical therapy, and surgery are the main therapeutic options offered to the patient. The conservative treatment of tendinopathies is still difficult, but several options have been proposed, including the use of anti-inflammatory molecules. In this retrospective study, we aimed to assess the efficacy of a conservative approach in improving pain and functional improvement in hip bursitis (HB) and biceps tendinitis (BT) patients. Methods: A series of data concerning the application of Polynucleotides High Purification Technology (PN HPTTM) in 47 patients with BT and HB was analyzed. All patients received three bi-weekly injections of PN HPTTM (T0-T2). Follow-up visits were performed at T3 (8 weeks from T2) and T4 (24 weeks from T2). Both the visual analog scale (VAS) for pain assessment and functional impairment (FI) scores were processed in the form of anonymized series for clinical improvement evaluations. Results: Statistically significant differences (p < 0.001) in pain reduction (-85%) and functional improvement (+86%) were found at the end of treatment. The levels of patient satisfaction (PS) and Clinical Global Improvement-Impression (CGI-I) were equal to 93% and 98%, respectively. According to the analyses, other patient data (e.g., gender, age, and BMI) did not appear to influence the positive treatment outcomes. Conclusions: The application of High Purification Technology (PN HPTTM) was shown to improve both pain and functional deterioration in patients with tendonitis in a similar manner to other conservative treatments. These retrospective analyses may open up new avenues for the implementation of conservative approaches in patients with tendinitis.

Arthroscopic Suprapectoral Biceps Tenodesis Using an Onlay Technique

Tenodesis of the long head of biceps is a common shoulder surgical procedure. Tenodesis can be performed either arthroscopically or open and within the glenohumeral joint, within the bicipital groove, or below the pectoralis major tendon insertion. Arthroscopic tenodesis of the biceps tendon reduces the risk of infection. Our technique may also address persistent pain due to over tensioning of the tenodesis or from lesions hidden within the groove, such as bicipital synovitis or partial tendon tears, that are not visualized in a standard open technique. We describe an all-arthroscopic onlay technique for biceps tendon fixation at an extra-articular position within the bicipital groove, above the pectoralis major insertion. The technique uses standard arthroscopic equipment and a single knotless suture anchor.

Biceps tenotomy vs. tenodesis: an ACS-NSQIP analysis of postoperative outcomes and utilization trends

Background

While studies have assessed comparative rates of restoration of shoulder function and alleviation of symptoms, comparative systemic postoperative complication rates between biceps tenotomy and tenodesis have yet to be assessed. The purpose of the present study was to use a national administrative database to perform a comprehensive investigation into 30-day complication rates after biceps tenotomy versus tenodesis, thus providing valuable insights for informed decision-making by clinicians and patients regarding the optimal surgical approach for pathologies of the long head of the biceps tendon.

Methods

The National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database was queried to analyze postoperative complication rates and metrics associated with biceps tenotomy and tenodesis. Patient data spanning from 2012 to 2021 was extracted, with relevant variables assessed to identify and compare these two surgical approaches. Adjusted and unadjusted analyses were utilized to analyze patient demographics, comorbidities, operative times, lengths of stay, readmissions, adverse events, and yearly surgical volume, along with trends in usage, across cohorts.

Results

Of 11,527 total patients, 264 (2.29%), 6826 (59.22%), and 4437 (38.49%) underwent tenotomy, tenodesis with open repair, and tenodesis with arthroscopic repair, respectively. Tenotomy operative times ([mean ± SD]: 66.25 ± 44.76 minutes) were shorter than those for open tenodesis (78.83 ± 41.82) and arthroscopic tenodesis (75.98 ± 40.16). Conversely, tenotomy patients had longer hospital days (0.88 ± 4.86 days) relative to open tenodesis (.08 ± 1.55) and arthroscopic tenodesis (.12 ± 2.70). Multivariable logistic regression controlling for demographics and comorbidities demonstrated that patients undergoing tenodesis were less likely to be readmitted (adjusted odds ratio [AOR]: 0.42, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.17-0.98, P = .050) or sustain serious adverse events (AOR: 0.27, 95% CI: 0.13-0.57, P < .001), but equally likely to sustain minor adverse events (AOR: 0.87, CI: 0.21-3.68, P = .850), compared with patients undergoing tenotomy. Lastly, comparing utilization rates from 2012 to 2021 revealed a significant decrease in the proportion of tenotomy (from 6.2% to 1.0%) compared to open tenodesis (from 41.0% to 57.3%) and arthroscopic tenodesis (52.8% to 41.64%; P trend = .001).

Conclusion

To our knowledge, this is the first large national database study investigating postoperative complication rates between the various surgical treatments for pathologies of the long head of the biceps tendon. Our results suggest that tenodesis yields fewer serious adverse events and lower readmission rates than tenotomy. We also found a shorter operative time for tenotomy. These findings support the increased utilization of tenodesis relative to tenotomy in recent years.

Subpectoral proximal humeral anatomy: Guidance to decrease risk of fracture following subpectoral biceps tenodesis

Background

Biceps tenodesis is used for a variety of shoulder and biceps pathologies. Humeral fracture is a significant complication of this procedure. This cadaveric anatomy study sought to determine the cortical thickness of the humeral proximal shaft to identify the optimal technique to decrease unicortical drilling and reduce the risk of fracture.

Methods

A computed tomography (CT) of eight cadaveric humeral specimens was obtained with a metallic marker placed at the site of subpectoral tenodesis. These scans were examined to define the cortical thickness of the subpectoral region of the humerus and determine angular safe zones for reaming.

Results

At the standard point of a subpectoral tenodesis, a mean angle relative to the coronal plane of 29.2° medially and 21.6° laterally from the deepest portion of the bicipital groove avoided unicortical drilling with a 7 mm reamer. These values varied slightly 1 cm proximal and distal to this level. The thickest regions of cortex in the subpectoral humerus correspond to the ridges of the bicipital groove.

Discussion

To avoid unicortical tunnels, surgeons should limit deviation from the perpendicular approach to no more than 23° relative to the coronal plane medially and 11° relative to the coronal plane laterally.

The long head of the biceps tendon: a valuable tool in shoulder surgery

ANATOMY AND FUNCTION

The long head of the biceps tendon (LHBT) has different properties and characteristics that render it a valuable tool in the hands of shoulder surgeons. Its accessibility, biomechanical strength, regenerative capabilities, and biocompatibility allow it to be a valuable autologous graft for repairing and augmenting ligamentous and muscular structures in the glenohumeral joint.

SHOULDER SURGERY APPLICATIONS

Numerous applications of the LHBT have been described in the shoulder surgery literature, including augmentation of posterior-superior rotator cuff repair, augmentation of subscapularis peel repair, dynamic anterior stabilization, anterior capsule reconstruction, post-stroke stabilization, and superior capsular reconstruction. Some of these applications have been described meticulously in technical notes and case reports, whereas others may require additional research to confirm clinical benefit and efficacy.

CONCLUSION

This review examines the role of the LHBT as a source of local autograft, with biological and biomechanical properties, in aiding outcomes of complex primary and revision shoulder surgery procedures.

Shoulder ultrasound imaging in the post-stroke population: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

Post-stroke shoulder pain is a serious challenge for stroke survivors. The aim of this meta-analysis was to review the literature to confirm information on structural changes in post-stroke shoulders detected by ultrasound examination.

METHODS

PubMed, Embase, Web of Science and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched until 7 December 2022, for studies describing shoulder sonographic findings in stroke patients. Two independent authors selected the studies, extracted the data, and performed the critical appraisal.

RESULTS

A total of 23 clinical studies were included. The most prevalent pathologies in hemiplegic shoulders pertained to the biceps long head tendon (41.4%), followed by the supraspinatus tendon (33.2%), subdeltoid bursa (29.3%), acromioclavicular joint (15.0%), and subscapularis tendon (9.2%). The common pathological findings encompassed bicipital peritendinous effusion (39.2%), biceps tendinopathy (35.5%), subdeltoid bursitis (29.3%) and supraspinatus tendinopathy (24.6%). Biceps long head tendon and supraspinatus tendon abnormalities were observed significantly more in the hemiplegic (vs contralateral) shoulders, with odds ratios of 3.814 (95% confidence interval 2.044-7.117) and 2.101 (95% confidence interval 1.257-3.512), respectively. No correlation was observed between motor function and shoulder pathology.

CONCLUSION

Ultrasonography enabled the identification of common shoulder pathologies after stroke. Further research is needed to establish the association between these changes and the clinical course of stroke patients.

Subpectoral Biceps Tenodesis Using an All-Suture Knotless Anchor

The long head of the biceps tendon is a common pain generator in the anterior shoulder and is concomitantly seen with other shoulder pathology including subacromial impingement, as well as rotator cuff and labral tears. This Technical Note describes a mini-open onlay biceps tenodesis technique using all-suture knotless anchor fixation. This technique is easily reproducible, is efficient, and offers the unique benefits of providing a consistent length-tension relation and mitigating the risk of peri-implant reaction and fracture without sacrificing strength of fixation.

Depressive and Anxiety Disorders Increase Risk for Recurrent Anterior Shoulder Pain Following Arthroscopic Suprapectoral Biceps Tenodesis

Purpose

To evaluate factors associated with postoperative anterior shoulder pain following arthroscopic suprapectoral biceps tenodesis (ABT) and to determine the clinical impact of postoperative anterior shoulder pain.

Methods

A retrospective study of patients that underwent ABT between 2016 and 2020 was conducted. Groups were categorized by the presence (ASP+) or absence (ASP-) of postoperative anterior shoulder pain. Patient-reported outcomes (American Shoulder and Elbow score [ASES], visual analog scale [VAS] for pain, subjective shoulder value [SSV]), strength, range of motion, and complication rates were analyzed. Differences between continuous and categorical variables were tested with two-sample t-tests and chi-squared or Fisher's exact tests, respectively. Variables collected at different postoperative timepoints were analyzed using mixed models with post hoc comparisons when significant interactions were detected.

Results

A total of 461 (47 ASP+, 414 ASP-) patients were included. A statistically significant lower mean age was observed in the ASP+ group (P < .001). A statistically significant higher prevalence of major depressive disorder (MDD) (P = .03) or any anxiety disorder (P = .002) was observed in the ASP+ group. Prescription medication with psychotropic medications (P = .01) was significantly more prevalent in the ASP+ group. No significant differences were observed in the proportion of individuals reaching the minimal clinical important difference (MCID) for ASES, VAS, or SSV between groups.

Conclusions

A pre-existing diagnosis of major depressive disorder or any anxiety disorder, as well as the use of psychotropic medications was associated with postoperative anterior shoulder pain following ABT. Other factors associated with anterior shoulder pain included younger age, participation in physical therapy before surgery, and lower rate of concomitant rotator cuff repair or subacromial decompression. Although the proportion of individuals reaching MCID did not differ between groups, the presence of anterior shoulder pain after ABT resulted in prolonged recovery, inferior PROs, and a higher incidence of repeat surgical procedures. The decision to perform ABT in patients diagnosed with MDD or anxiety should be carefully considered, given the correlation to postoperative anterior shoulder pain and inferior outcomes.

Level of Evidence

Level III, retrospective case-control study.

Biceps Tenodesis in Patients Age 35 Years and Younger Yields Favorable Clinical Outcomes With Variable Rates of Return to Sport and Complications: A Systematic Review

PURPOSE

To systematically evaluate reported clinical outcomes, return-to-sport (RTS) rates, and complications following biceps tenodesis in patients aged 35 years and younger and compare outcomes between overhead and nonoverhead athletes.

METHODS

A literature search was performed by querying Scopus, EMBASE, and PubMed computerized databases from database inception through August 2022 in accordance with the 2020 Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis guidelines. Studies that evaluated clinical outcomes following biceps tenodesis in patients aged 35 years or younger were included. Study quality was assessed via the Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies criteria. Clinical outcomes, RTS rates, and complications were aggregated.

RESULTS

Nine studies from 2011 to 2022 comprising 161 patients (mean age, 25 years; range, 19.7-28.9 years) were included. At an average follow-up of 59 months, postoperative American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score ranged from 81.6 to 96 and the mean visual analog scale score ranged from 0 to 2.1. Mean overall RTS rate ranged from 35% to 100% for the entire patient cohort 35% to 86% among overhead athletes, and 46% to 100% among nonoverhead athletes. Among the overhead athletes, 24 were baseball pitchers. 17% to 100% able to return to sport at any level. Complications were reported in 0% to 19% of patients. 0 to 18% of patients underwent revision surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

Biceps tenodesis in patients 35 years of age and younger yields a wide variability in reported RTS rates, excellent clinical outcome scores, and low but variable reported rates of complications, reoperations, and failure.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV; Systematic Review of Level III and IV studies.

Nonoperative Treatment of the Biceps-Labral Complex

The long head of the biceps and superior labrum should be evaluated as an interdependent functional unit. A focused patient history and physical examination including multiple provocative tests should be performed alongside advanced imaging studies to obtain an accurate diagnosis. Nonoperative treatment modalities including nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, glucocorticoid injections, and a standardized physical therapy regimen should be exhausted before operative intervention. Significant improvements in pain, functional outcomes, and quality of life are achieved in patients treated nonoperatively. Although these outcomes are less consistent for overhead athletes, return to play and performance metrics seem comparable to those who undergo surgery.

The role of elbow positioning on arthroscopic assessment of the long head of biceps tendon in the beach chair position

Background

Tendinopathy of the long head of biceps (LHB) tendon is a common cause of anterior shoulder pain and dysfunction. The extra‐articular portion within the bicipital groove undergoes frequent load and friction during shoulder movements and pathology within this area is frequently missed during arthroscopic assessment.

Methods

We quantified the arthroscopically assessable length of tendon within the shoulder in 14 consecutive patients undergoing subpectoral biceps tenodesis. After biceps tenotomy at the superior labrum, the tagged tendon was maximally tensioned and marked at the biceps outlet with the elbow in extension and flexion. The distance in distance between the two were measured.

Results

Mean distance from the superior labral insertion of the biceps to the outlet was 16.4 ± 4.1 mm (range, 11–25). With tension on the biceps with elbow extension, the mean measurable distance was 31.3 ± 6.7 mm (range, 19–45). With elbow flexion, this increased to 39.5 ± 5.9 mm (range, 25–52). Mean increase in visible tendon length was 8.2 ± 4.3 mm (range, 5–21) (p = 0.002).

Conclusion

Elbow flexion results in an average increase of 26.2% more extra‐articular tendon visualized at arthroscopy. Therefore, we believe that elbow flexion is a useful adjunct, especially when performed in conjunction with techniques that pull the tendon into the joint, thus allowing for more complete arthroscopic assessment of the LHB, increasing detection of symptomatic biceps tendonitis.

Level of evidence: Level IV.

Histopathology of long head of biceps tendon removed during tenodesis demonstrates degenerative histopathology and not inflammatory changes

Background

The aim of this study is to describe and quantitatively analyze the histopathology of proximal long head biceps (LHB) tendinopathy in patients who have undergone LHB tenodesis. The hypothesis is that severe histopathologic changes of the LHB tendon (LHBT) will most likely be reflected with improved postoperative clinical outcomes.

Methods

The study included patients with isolated LHB tendinopathy or LHB tendinopathy associated with concomitant shoulder pathologies. All had failed conservative treatment (12 months) and had a positive pain response (> 50% reduction) pre-operatively after LHB tendon injection with local anesthetic. All underwent biceps tenodesis procedure between 2008 and 2014. Tendon specimens were collected and histologically analyzed with the semi-quantitative Bonar scoring system. Minimum follow-up time was 1 year. A subset of patients was retrospectively reviewed postoperatively and evaluated employing visual analogue score (VAS), short form survey (SF-12), American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeon (ASES) score, Disability of Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) score, and Oxford Shoulder Score (OSS) and postoperative return to work status.

Results

Forty-five biceps tendon specimens were obtained from 44 patients (mean age 50 ± 9.6 years). Histopathological analyses demonstrated advanced degenerative changes with myxoid degeneration and marked collagen disorganization. Minimal inflammation was identified. There were no regional differences in histopathological changes. Clinical outcomes did not correlate significantly with severity of histopathologic changes.

Conclusions

This study confirms that LHBT specimens in patients undergoing tenodesis demonstrate with the use of the Bonar score histopathologic changes of chronic degeneration and not inflammation. The correct histopathologic terminology for this process is LHB tendinosis. The histopathological changes appear uniform throughout the entire length of the LHBT which may inform the nature of the procedure performed.

Arthroscopic Evaluation of the Long Head of the Biceps Tendon: Traditional Versus Allis Clamp Techniques

Using a probe to retract the long head of the biceps tendon (LHBT) into the joint is common practice for visualizing the extra-articular portions during arthroscopy. However, extra-articular lesions may be missed in up to half of cases. Greater excursion of the LHBT may be achieved with an Allis clamp grasper. Our goal was to quantify portions of the extra-articular LHBT that could be visualized during shoulder arthroscopy with the Allis clamp and probe techniques. Shoulder arthroscopy was performed on 8 forequarter cadaveric specimens in the simulated beach chair position, and the most distal extent of the intra-articular LHBT was marked. The tendon was pulled into the joint with both techniques, and the additional exposed tendon portion was marked. An open approach was performed, and the locations of the 3 marks were assessed relative to total tendon length. Mean LHBT total length was 96.25 mm. Diagnostic arthroscopy allowed visualization of a mean of 21.75 mm of the intra-articular tendon (22.6% of the total length). The traditional probe technique provided visualization of 31.13 mm (32.8%). The Allis clamp technique provided visualization of 49.38 mm (52%) and increased visualization of the LHBT by 58.6% (P<.0001). A mean of 46.87 mm (48%) of the LHBT remained unvisualized. The Allis clamp technique maximizes arthroscopic visualization of extra-articular LHBT. The distal 48% eludes evaluation, but can be visualized when combined with an open technique without the need to divide the transverse humeral ligament. The Allis clamp technique facilitates additional identification of LHBT pathology that could otherwise remain hidden during shoulder arthroscopy. Because the LHBT is a major source of pain in the shoulder, this technique may improve outcomes of shoulder arthroscopy and reduce the need for revision because of remnant anterior shoulder pain. [Orthopedics. 2022;45(1):38-42.].

Clinical Outcomes of Revision Biceps Tenodesis for Failed Long Head of Biceps Surgery: A Systematic Review

PURPOSE

We summarize the indications, assess the modes of failure, and analyze the clinical and functional outcomes of revision biceps tenodesis after failed primary surgical treatment of long head of biceps (LHB) pathology.

METHODS

A computerized search of PubMed, EMBASE, and CINAHL databases and manual screening of selected article reference lists was performed in September 2020. Randomized controlled trial, cohort, case-control, and case series studies reporting clinical outcomes of revision biceps tenodesis following failed LHB surgery were eligible. Patient demographics, indications for revision, intraoperative findings, surgical techniques, and patient-reported outcomes were recorded. Functional assessment and pain scores were assessed and summarized as forest plots with means and 95% confidence intervals.

RESULTS

Five of 465 identified studies met inclusion criteria, encompassing 70 revision biceps tenodesis procedures with mean follow-up of 2.4-6.4 years. The failed index procedure was biceps tenodesis in 62 patients and tenotomy in 8 patients. The most common indications for revision were pain or cramping and rerupture, cited by 4 and 3 articles, respectively. After failed conservative treatment, open subpectoral revision tenodesis was performed with concomitant arthroscopic debridement in 65 of 70 cases. Common intraoperative findings at time of revision were adhesions or scarring (39.0-83.0%), fixation failure (8.7-75.0%), and biceps rupture (17.4-80.0%). Revision tenodesis patients reported good to excellent functional outcomes with improvements in Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation, American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Shoulder, and visual analog scale pain scores, and satisfaction ranged from 88.0 to 100%. All studies demonstrated moderate quality of evidence and risk of bias when critically appraised.

CONCLUSION

This systematic review of 5 moderate risk of bias studies demonstrated that the most common reasons for revision biceps tenodesis were pain or cramping and rerupture. Open subpectoral revision tenodesis with concomitant arthroscopic debridement provided improvements in functional scores with high patient satisfaction at mid-term follow up.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV, Systematic Review of level III and IV investigations.

Mini-Open Subpectoral Biceps Tenodesis Using a Suture Anchor with Bone-Bridge Backup

Pathology of the long head of the biceps tendon is a known cause of anterior shoulder pain. Current surgical management options include tenotomy and tenodesis. Tenodesis can be performed arthroscopically or as an open procedure. Arthroscopic tenodesis typically uses a suprapectoral attachment, which may fail to address tendon pathology in the bicipital groove. Open tenodesis carries iatrogenic risk to neurovascular structures and a fracture risk while drilling, as well as the morbidity of an open procedure. This technique paper describes a mini-open subpectoral approach using a suture anchor and bone bridge backup for dual fixation. Use of a suture anchor instead of an interference screw reduces drill hole diameter reducing the risk of iatrogenic humeral fracture. Dual fixation provides a robust repair which may be of use for athletic patients desiring an accelerated recovery.

Early success of the arthroscopic-assisted locked loop suprapectoral biceps tenodesis

Background

There is wide variability in surgical technique for biceps tenodesis. Prior biomechanical studies have demonstrated superior ultimate and fatigue strength with a Krakow-type locked loop when compared with simple suture and lasso-loop configurations; however, this had not yet been clinically studied. The purpose of this study was to assess the short-term results an arthroscopic-assisted locked loop (ALL) suprapectoral biceps tenodesis technique.

Methods

All patients who underwent an ALL suprapectoral biceps tenodesis by a single surgeon from 2012 and 2019 with a minimum of 12-month follow-up were analyzed. Data collected included demographics, surgical indications, concomitant operative procedures, and postoperative complications of anterior shoulder "groove" pain, "Popeye deformity," biceps muscle cramping pain, and need for revision surgery.

Results

Forty patients who underwent an ALL suprapectoral biceps tenodesis met inclusion criteria. Patients were 55.6 ± 8.6 years of age, consisting of 28 men (57%) and 21 women (43%). The median follow-up was 19.3 months. At the latest follow-up, 1 (2%) patient had anterior shoulder "groove" pain, and no patients had a Popeye deformity or biceps muscle cramping. There were no revision biceps tenodesis procedures.

Conclusion

The ALL suprapectoral biceps tenodesis technique results in a low incidence of postoperative complications. At a short-term follow-up of 1 year, no patients had reoperations or revisions for failed biceps tenodesis. Groove pain was nearly absent in this series of patients.

Clinical Outcomes of Arthroscopic Tenodesis Versus Tenotomy for Long Head of the Biceps Tendon Lesions: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials and Cohort Studies

Background

Controversy exists concerning whether tenotomy or tenodesis is the optimal surgical treatment option for proximal biceps tendon lesions.

Purpose

To evaluate the clinical outcomes after arthroscopic tenodesis and tenotomy in the treatment of long head of the biceps tendon (LHBT) lesions.

Study Design

Systematic review; Level of evidence, 4.

Methods

A systematic review was performed by searching PubMed, the Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and Embase to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and cohort studies that compared the clinical efficacy of tenotomy with that of tenodesis for LHBT lesions. A standardized data extraction form was predesigned to obtain bibliographic information of the study as well as patient, intervention, comparison, and outcome data. A random-effects model was used to pool quantitative data from the primary outcomes.

Results

A total of 21 eligible studies were separated into 3 methodological groups: (1) 4 RCTs with level 1 evidence, (2) 3 RCTs and 4 prospective cohort studies with level 2 evidence, and (3) 10 retrospective cohort studies with level 3 to 4 evidence. Analysis of the 3 groups demonstrated a significantly higher risk of the Popeye sign after tenotomy versus tenodesis (group 1: risk ratio [RR], 3.29 [95% CI, 1.92-5.49]; group 2: RR, 2.35 [95% CI, 1.43-3.85]; and group 3: RR, 2.57 [95% CI, 1.33-4.98]). Arm cramping pain remained significantly higher after tenotomy only in the retrospective cohort group (RR, 2.17 [95% CI, 1.20-3.95]). The Constant score for tenotomy was significantly worse than that for tenodesis in the prospective cohort group (standardized mean difference [SMD], -0.47 [95% CI, -0.73 to -0.21]), as were the forearm supination strength index (SMD, -0.75 [95% CI, -1.28 to -0.21]) and the Simple Shoulder Test (SST) score (SMD, -0.60 [95% CI, -0.94 to -0.27]).

Conclusion

The results demonstrated that compared with tenodesis, tenotomy had a higher risk of a Popeye deformity in all 3 study groups; worse functional outcomes in terms of the Constant score, forearm supination strength index, and SST score according to prospective cohort studies; and a higher incidence of arm cramping pain according to retrospective cohort studies.

Characterization of the Proximal Long Head of Biceps Tendon Anatomy Using Magnetic Resonance Imaging: Implications for Biceps Tenodesis

BACKGROUND

Biceps tenodesis is a common treatment for proximal long head of biceps (LHB) tendon pathology. To maintain biceps strength and contour and minimize cramping, restoration of muscle-length tension and appropriate positioning of the tenodesis is key. Little is known about the biceps musculotendinous junction (MTJ) anatomy, especially in relation to the overlying pectoralis major tendon (PMT), which is a commonly used landmark for tenodesis positioning.

PURPOSE

To characterize the in vivo topographic anatomy of the LHB tendon, in particular the MTJ relative to the PMT, using a novel axial proton-density magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) sequence.

STUDY DESIGN

Descriptive laboratory study.

METHODS

In total, 45 patients having a shoulder MRI for symptoms unrelated to their biceps tendon or rotator cuff were prospectively recruited. There were 33 men and 12 women, with a mean age of 37 ± 13 years (range, 18-59 years). All patients underwent routine shoulder MRI scans with an additional axial proton density sequence examining the LHB tendon and its MTJ. Three independent observers reviewed each MRI scan, and measurements were obtained for (1) MTJ length, (2) the distance between the proximal MTJ and the superior border of the PMT (MTJ-S), (3) the distance between the distal MTJ to the inferior border of the PMT, and (4) the width of the PMT.

RESULTS

The average position of the MTJ-S was 5.9 ± 10.8 mm distal to the superior border of the PMT. The mean MTJ length was 32.5 ± 8.3 mm and the width of the PMT was 28.0 ± 7.3 mm. We found no significant correlation between patient age, height, sex, or body mass index and any of the biceps measurements. We observed wide variability of the MTJ-S position and identified 3 distinct types of biceps MTJ: type 1, MTJ-S above the PMT; type 2, MTJ-S between 0 and 10 mm below the superior border of the PMT; and type 3, MTJ-S >10 mm distal to the superior PMT.

CONCLUSION

In this study, the in vivo anatomy of the LHB tendon is characterized relative to the PMT using a novel MRI sequence. The results demonstrate wide variability in the position of the MTJ relative to the PMT, which can be classified into 3 distinct subtypes or zones relative to the superior border of the PMT. Understanding this potentially allows for accurate and anatomic placement of the biceps tendon for tenodesis.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

To our knowledge, this is the first study to radiologically analyze the in vivo topographic anatomy of the LHB tendon and its MTJ. The results of this study provide more detailed understanding of the variability of the biceps MTJ, thus allowing for more accurate placement of the biceps tendon during tenodesis.

Measurements of Tendon Movement Within the Bicipital Groove After Suprapectoral Intra-articular Biceps Tenodesis in a Cadaveric Model

Background

Lesions of the long head of the biceps can be successfully treated with biceps tenotomy or tenodesis when surgical management is elected. The advantage of a tenodesis is that it prevents the potential development of a cosmetic deformity or cramping muscle pain. Proponents of a subpectoral tenodesis believe that "groove pain" may remain a problem after suprapectoral tenodesis as a result of persistent motion of the tendon within the bicipital groove.

Purpose/Hypothesis

To evaluate the motion of the biceps tendon within the bicipital groove before and after a suprapectoral intra-articular tenodesis. The hypothesis was that there would be minimal to no motion of the biceps tendon within the bicipital groove after tenodesis.

Study Design

Controlled laboratory study.

Methods

Six fresh-frozen cadaveric arms were dissected to expose the long head of the biceps tendon as well as the bicipital groove. Inclinometers and fiducials (optical markers) were used to measure the motions of the scapula, forearm, and biceps tendon through a full range of shoulder and elbow motions. A suprapectoral biceps tenodesis was then performed, and the motions were repeated. The motion of the biceps tendon was quantified as a function of scapular or forearm motion in each plane, both before and after the tenodesis.

Results

There was minimal motion of the native biceps tendon during elbow flexion and extension but significant motion during all planes of scapular motion before tenodesis, with the most motion occurring during shoulder flexion-extension (20.73 ± 8.21 mm). The motion of the biceps tendon after tenodesis was significantly reduced during every plane of scapular motion compared with the native state (P < .01 in all planes of motion), with a maximum motion of only 1.57 mm.

Conclusion

There was a statistically significant reduction in motion of the biceps tendon in all planes of scapular motion after the intra-articular biceps tenodesis. The motion of the biceps tendon within the bicipital groove was essentially eliminated after the suprapectoral biceps tenodesis.

Clinical Relevance

This arthroscopic suprapectoral tenodesis technique can significantly reduce motion of the biceps tendon within the groove in this cadaveric study, possibly reducing the likelihood of groove pain in the clinical setting.

[Injuries of the biceps-labrum complex : Principles, pathologies and treatment concepts]

BACKGROUND

The biceps-labrum complex is prone to acute lesions and degenerative changes due to its anatomical structure and the high load it has to endure. Pathological changes of these structures are common pain generators and can significantly impair shoulder function. Anatomically, the biceps-labrum complex can be divided into three zones: inside, junction and bicipital tunnel.

DIAGNOSTIC PROCEDURE

Despite the focused physical examination and advancements in imaging techniques, the exact localization of pathologies remains challenging. Arthroscopy can be used to accurately diagnose inside and junctional pathologies but extra-articular changes in the region of the bicipital tunnel can only be partially visualized.

TREATMENT

In cases of unsuccessful conservative treatment and correct indications, a high level of patient satisfaction can be surgically achieved. In young patients an anatomical reconstruction of inside lesions or tenodesis of the long head of the biceps tendon is performed; however, even tenotomy is a valuable option and can achieve equally satisfactory results. Unaddressed pathological changes of the bicipital tunnel can lead to persistence of pain. In clinical procedures performing tenodesis, both the different techniques and the implants used have been found to show similar results. This article describes the anatomical principles, pathological changes, the focused clinical instrumental diagnostics and discusses the different treatment philosophies as well as the outcome according to the recent literature.

Conversion of Failed Proximal Long Head of the Biceps Tenodesis to Distal Subpectoral Tenodesis: Outcomes in an Active Population

PURPOSE

To assess failure rates and patient reported outcomes following revision of failed proximal long head of the biceps (LHB) tenodesis.

METHODS

Patients from an active-military population who underwent revision proximal (suprapectoral) to distal (subpectoral) LHB tenodesis were prospectively enrolled. Patients were included if they were between the ages of 16 and 60 years presenting after a previous biceps tenodesis with mechanical failure and clinical failure, defined as Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (SANE) or American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) <70. Exclusion criteria were concomitant rotator cuff repair or debridement, full-thickness rotator cuff tear, extensive labral tears, or any evidence of glenohumeral arthritis. Pre- and postoperative SANE and ASES were documented and analyzed.

RESULTS

From 2004 to 2010, a total of 12 patients (all male) with a mean age of 39.9 years (range, 30-54 years) were assessed at a mean follow-up time of 29 months (range, 24-38 months). Nine patients presented with a failed tenodesis construct located at the top of the bicipital groove and 9 patients had LHB tendons originally affixed with an interference screw. Diagnostic arthroscopy revealed that the majority of patients (10/12) had excessive scarring at the site of previous fixation. Mean preoperative assessments of SANE (70.4) and ASES (59.9) improved postoperatively to SANE (90.3; P < .01) and ASES (89.8; P < .01). No patients were lost due to follow-up, and there were no reported complications or failures. All patients returned to full active duty and were able to perform all required physical tests before returning to their vocation.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients presenting with symptoms following a proximal LHB tenodesis can be successfully converted to a distal (subpectoral) LHB tenodesis with favorable outcomes. Although in a small sample, there was excessive scarring and synovitis in a majority, which improved significantly when treated with a revision subpectoral tenodesis with minimal complication risk and no reported failures.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV (Therapeutic case series).

A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Biceps Tenodesis Fixation Strengths: Fixation Type and Location Are Biomechanically Equivalent

PURPOSE

The purpose of this meta-analysis and systematic review was to critically evaluate the biomechanical outcomes of different fixation constructs for a variety of biceps tenodesis techniques in cadaveric models based on both type of fixation and location.

METHODS

A PROSPERO-registered systematic review (CCRD42018109243) of the current literature was conducted with the terms "long head of biceps" AND "tenodesis" AND "biomechanics" and numerous variations thereof in the PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases, yielding 1,460 abstracts. After screening by eligibility criteria, 18 full-text articles were included. The individual biomechanical factors evaluated included ultimate load to failure (in newtons), stiffness (in newtons per millimeter), and cyclic displacement (in millimeters). After reviewing the included literature, we performed a quality analysis of the studies (Quality Appraisal for Cadaveric Studies scale score) and a meta-analysis comparing raw mean differences in data between the suprapectoral and subpectoral fixation location groups, as well as between the fixation construct groups.

RESULTS

Among the 18 included studies, 347 cadaveric specimens were evaluated for ultimate load to failure, stiffness, and cyclic displacement when comparing both location (suprapectoral vs subpectoral) and tenodesis fixation type (interference screw vs cortical button, suture anchor, or all-soft-tissue techniques). Interference screw fixation showed significantly greater mean stiffness by 8.0 N/mm (P = .013) compared with the other grouped techniques but did not show significant differences when evaluated for ultimate load to failure and cyclic displacement (P = .28 and P = .18, respectively). Additionally, no difference in construct strength was seen when comparing the fixation strength of suprapectoral versus subpectoral techniques for stiffness, ultimate load to failure, and cyclic loading (P = .47, P = .053, and P = .13, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

In this meta-analysis, no significant biomechanical differences were found when the results were stratified by specific surgical technique (interference screw vs other tenodesis techniques) and location (suprapectoral vs subpectoral biceps tenodesis).

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

As a result of this study, when biomechanically evaluating specific tenodesis constructs, the individual clinician has the liberty of choosing the fixation technique based on his or her preference and knowledge of shortcomings of each type of fixation construct.

Outcomes and Complications After Primary Arthroscopic Suprapectoral Versus Open Subpectoral Biceps Tenodesis for Superior Labral Anterior-Posterior Tears or Biceps Abnormalities: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Background:

Biceps tenodesis is a surgical treatment for both superior labral anterior-posterior (SLAP) tears and long head of the biceps tendon (LHBT) abnormalities. Biceps tenodesis can be performed either above or below the pectoralis major tendon with arthroscopic or open techniques.

Purpose:

To analyze the outcomes and complications comparing primary arthroscopic suprapectoral versus open subpectoral biceps tenodesis for either SLAP tears or LHBT disorders.

Study Design:

Systematic review; Level of evidence, 4.

Methods:

A search strategy based on the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Meta-Analyses) protocol was used to include 18 articles (471 patients) from a total of 974 articles identified. Overall exclusion criteria included the following: non–English language, non–full text, biceps tenodesis with concomitant rotator cuff repair, review articles, meta-analyses, and case reports. Data were extracted and analyzed according to procedure type and tenodesis location: arthroscopic suprapectoral biceps tenodesis (295 patients) versus open subpectoral bicepts tenodesis (176 patients).

Results:

For arthroscopic suprapectoral biceps tenodesis, the weighted mean American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) score was 90.0 (97 patients) and the weighted mean Constant score was 88.7 (108 patients); for open subpectoral biceps tenodesis, the mean ASES score was 91.1 (199 patients) and mean Constant score was 84.7 (65 patients). Among the 176 patients who underwent arthroscopic biceps tenodesis, there was an overall complication rate of 9.1%. Among the 295 patients who underwent open biceps tenodesis, there was an overall complication rate of 13.5%. Both residual pain (5.7% vs 4.7%, respectively) and Popeye deformity (1.7% vs 1.0%, respectively) rates were similar between the groups. Open subpectoral biceps tenodesis had higher reoperation (3.0% vs 0.0%, respectively), wound complication (1.0% vs 0.0%, respectively), and nerve injury (0.7% vs 0.0%, respectively) rates postoperatively. A meta-analysis of 3 studies demonstrated that both methods had similar ASES scores (P = .36) as well as all-cause complication rates (odds ratio, 0.76 [95% CI, 0.13-4.48]; P = .26).

Conclusion:

Patients undergoing arthroscopic suprapectoral biceps tenodesis for either SLAP tears or LHBT abnormalities had similar outcome scores and complication rates compared with those undergoing open subpectoral biceps tenodesis. Additionally, both residual pain and Popeye deformity rates were similar between the 2 groups.

Comparison between SLAP Repair and Biceps Tenodesis with Concomitant Rotator Cuff Repair in Patients Older than 45 Years: Minimum 2-Year Clinical and Imaging Outcomes

Backgroud

There is controversy over how to surgically treat symptomatic superior labrum anterior to posterior (SLAP) tears in middle-aged patients with concomitant rotator cuff tears. The aim of the study was to compare the clinical and imaging outcomes of SLAP repair versus biceps tenodesis (BT) each combined with arthroscopic rotator cuff repair (ARCR).

Methods

We retrospectively reviewed 35 patients older than 45 years who underwent arthroscopic surgery to manage concomitant SLAP tears and rotator cuff tears. In addition to ARCR, 17 patients underwent SLAP repair, whereas 18 patients underwent BT. Shoulder range of motion (ROM), visual analog scale (VAS) for pain, American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) score, Constant score, and University of California at Los Angeles (UCLA) score were used for clinical assessment. The integrity of rotator cuff repair and change of superior labrum-biceps complex were evaluated by postoperative magnetic resonance imaging (MRI).

Results

There was significant improvement in the pain VAS and all functional scores in both groups (p < 0.001) at a mean followup of 29.4 ± 11.4 months (range, 24–84 months) postoperatively. Shoulder ROM showed significant improvement postoperatively (p < 0.05). No significant difference in outcomes could be found between the 2 groups after surgery. The retear rate of rotator cuff repair on MRI was 11.8% in the SLAP repair group and 11.1% in the BT group.

Conclusions

In middle-aged patients with combined SLAP lesions and rotator cuff tears, both SLAP repair and BT can be safe adjuncts to ARCR.

Suprapectoral versus subpectoral tenodesis for Long Head Biceps Brachii tendinopathy: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Suprapectoral long head biceps (LHB) tenodesis and subpectoral LHB tenodesis are both commonly performed surgical procedures. Due to the more proximal position of the suprapectoral tenodesis site this technique may be accompanied with more postoperative pain in the bicipital groove and cramping pain in the biceps muscle. We hypothesized that subpectoral tenodesis is associated with a better clinical outcome than suprapectoral tenodesis.

METHODS

A literature search was conducted in PubMed and Embase from January 2000 to July 2019 with the terms "biceps" and "tenodesis". Only comparing studies reporting on American Shoulder Elbow Score (ASES), VAS for anterior shoulder pain, Constant Murley Score (CMS), pain in the bicipital groove and Popeye deformity following suprapectoral and subpectoral tenodesis were included. Quality assessment of included articles was performed using the Coleman score.

RESULTS

Seven comparative studies with 409 patients reporting the results of LHB suprapectoral and subpectoral tenodesis were included. A significant, but clinically irrelevant difference in ASES (mean difference 2.15) p=0.01 was observed. No significant difference in CMS (mean difference 0.09), VAS for anterior shoulder pain (mean difference 0.01), Popeye deformity (odds ratio 3.19) and persistent bicipital pain (odds ratio 2.66). The Coleman score ranged between 53 and 87.

CONCLUSION

Based on this meta-analysis we found a significantly, though not clinically relevant difference in ASES in favour of subpectoral LHB tenodesis when compared with suprapectoral LHB tenodesis. Comparable results were found with regard to outcome scores, pain in the bicipital groove and avoiding a Popeye deformity.

Biceps Tenodesis Versus Tenotomy in the Treatment of Lesions of the Long Head of the Biceps Tendon in Patients Undergoing Arthroscopic Shoulder Surgery: A Prospective Double-Blinded Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

The biceps tendon is a known source of shoulder pain. Few high-level studies have attempted to determine whether biceps tenotomy or tenodesis is the optimal approach in the treatment of biceps pathology. Most available literature is of lesser scientific quality and shows varying results in the comparison of tenotomy and tenodesis.

PURPOSE

To compare patient-reported and objective clinical results between tenotomy and tenodesis for the treatment of lesions of the long head of the biceps brachii.

STUDY DESIGN

Randomized controlled trial; Level of evidence, 1.

METHODS

Patients aged ≥18 years undergoing arthroscopic surgery with intraoperative confirmation of a lesion of the long head of the biceps tendon were randomized. The primary outcome measure was the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) score, while secondary outcomes included the Western Ontario Rotator Cuff Index (WORC) score, elbow and shoulder strength, operative time, complications, and the incidence of revision surgery with each procedure. Magnetic resonance imaging was performed at postoperative 1 year to evaluate the integrity of the procedure in the tenodesis group.

RESULTS

A total of 114 participants with a mean age of 57.7 years (range, 34 years to 86 years) were randomized to undergo either biceps tenodesis or tenotomy. ASES and WORC scores improved significantly from pre- to postoperative time points, with a mean difference of 32.3% (P < .001) and 37.3% (P < .001), respectively, with no difference between groups in either outcome from presurgery to postoperative 24 months. The relative risk of cosmetic deformity in the tenotomy group relative to the tenodesis group at 24 months was 3.5 (95% CI, 1.26-9.70; P = .016), with 4 (10%) occurrences in the tenodesis group and 15 (33%) in the tenotomy group. Pain improved from 3 to 24 months postoperatively (P < .001) with no difference between groups. Cramping was not different between groups, nor was any improvement in cramping seen over time. There were no differences between groups in elbow flexion strength or supination strength. Follow-up magnetic resonance imaging at postoperative 12 months showed that the tenodesis was intact for all patients.

CONCLUSION

Tenotomy and tenodesis as treatment for lesions of the long head of biceps tendon both result in good subjective outcomes but there is a higher rate of Popeye deformity in the tenotomy group.

REGISTRATION

NCT01747902 ( ClinicalTrials.gov identifier).

Biceps tenotomy has earlier pain relief compared to biceps tenodesis: a randomized prospective study

PURPOSE

 Surgical management for long head of the biceps (LHB) tendinopathy with either biceps tenotomy or tenodesis is a reliable, but debated treatment option. The aim of this prospective, randomized, single-blinded study is to evaluate differences in pain relief and subjective outcomes between biceps tenotomy versus tenodesis for LHB tendinopathy.

METHODS

 Subjects were randomized and blinded to biceps tenotomy versus arthroscopic tenodesis intra-operatively. Outcomes evaluated included subjective patient outcome scores, pain, and cosmetic deformity. Subjective outcomes scores and pain were analyzed using a two-way ANOVA, controlling for concomitant rotator cuff repair. Binary outcomes were compared using Chi-square tests.

RESULTS

 Thirty-four subjects (31 male, 3 female) with a median age of 56 (range 30-77) were enrolled. Twenty subjects were randomized to tenotomy and 14 to tenodesis. Fifty-six percent had concomitant rotator cuff repairs. The mean VAS pain score at 3 months was lower with tenotomy versus tenodesis. 2-year follow-up demonstrated no statistically significant differences for VAS, ASES, or SANE. 15/20 (75%) subjects with biceps tenotomy reported no pain medication use at the 2-week postoperative visit versus 5/14 (33%) for biceps tenodesis. Popeye deformity was found in 5/20 (25%) of tenotomy subjects versus 1/14 (7%) in tenodesis subjects.

CONCLUSION

Outcomes appear similar between biceps tenotomy versus tenodesis; however, the tenotomy group demonstrated greater incidence of cosmetic deformity but an earlier improvement in postoperative pain.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Treatment Studies, Level II.

Case-control comparison of "in-the-groove" and lateral-row arthroscopic biceps tenodesis with concomitant rotator cuff repair

Background

Lateral-row (LR) arthroscopic biceps tenodesis (BT) has been described as a technique using an LR rotator cuff repair (RCR) anchor for biceps fixation. This technique has not been compared with other BT techniques. The purpose of this study was to compare the clinical outcomes of patients undergoing a suprapectoral "in-the-groove" arthroscopic BT and patients treated with an LR tenodesis performed in conjunction with arthroscopic RCR.

Methods

Patients undergoing arthroscopic BT in the setting of an arthroscopic RCR were evaluated preoperatively and at a minimum of 12 months' follow-up. Patients who underwent an in-the-groove BT were matched 1:1 to patients who underwent an LR BT based on age at surgery and size of the rotator cuff tear using the Patte classification. Comparisons made included age, sex, body mass index, patient-reported outcome measures, range of motion, and patient satisfaction.

Results

There were 82 patients (41 in each group) who met the inclusion criteria, with an average follow-up period of 33 months and average age of 61 years. By use of the Patte classification, there were 20 matched pairs with stage 1 tears, 11 matched pairs with stage 2 tears, and 10 matched pairs with stage 3 tears. Comparisons of the 2 cohorts revealed no differences in preoperative or postoperative motion, patient-reported outcome measures, or patient satisfaction. Furthermore, no differences were found in overall improvements in motion or outcome measures, as well as overall satisfaction.

Conclusions

Patients undergoing simultaneous RCR and BT demonstrate similar patient-reported and objective outcomes for both LR tenodesis and in-the-groove tenodesis techniques.

Patient-determined outcomes after arthroscopic rotator cuff repair with and without biceps tenodesis utilizing the PITT technique

HYPOTHESIS AND BACKGROUND

The percutaneous intra-articular transtendon technique (PITT) is a simple, rapid, and low-cost method of performing a biceps tenodesis. Few studies exist that examine the patient-determined outcomes of this technique in general or in patients undergoing arthroscopic rotator cuff repair (RCR) with and without biceps tenodesis. We hypothesized that patients undergoing an isolated arthroscopic RCR would have equivalent outcomes to those undergoing RCRs with PITT biceps tenodesis.

METHODS

We compared preoperative, patient-determined outcomes scores on patients undergoing primary arthroscopic RCR with and without a PITT biceps tenodesis with postoperative scores at a minimum of 2 years. These scores included the Western Ontario Rotator Cuff score (WORC), American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score (ASES), Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (SANE), Simple Shoulder Test (SST), and Shoulder Activity Level (SAL). Indication for a concomitant biceps tenodesis was a partial long head biceps tendon tear or biceps instability/subluxation.

RESULTS

A total of 153 patients underwent an isolated RCR and 131 patients underwent RCR with biceps tenodesis (RCRBT). Both groups had improvements in WORC, ASES, SANE, and SST (P < .0001) and deteriorations in the SAL (P ≤ .005). There was no difference in the change in outcome scores between the groups (RCRBT vs. RCR, respectively) for WORC (46 vs. 47; P = .85), ASES (46 vs. 47; P = .82), SANE (53 vs. 51; P = .35), SST (5.8 vs. 5.8; P = .93), and SAL (-0.9 vs. -1.4; P = .46). There was no difference between the groups in complications that required revision surgery (1.5% vs. 1.3%; P = .91).

CONCLUSIONS

Arthroscopic PITT RCRBT is safe and effective with equivalent patient-determined outcomes compared with patients undergoing RCR without biceps tenodesis.

Long Head of Biceps Injury: Treatment Options and Decision Making

The long head of the biceps brachii is a well-known "pain generator" in the shoulder. Biceps tendinitis, instability, and rupture encompass the majority of symptomatic lesions. Clinical diagnosis, particularly of biceps tendinitis, can be difficult, given the nonspecific physical examination findings. Treatment options are initially nonoperative, with surgical management reserved for specific presentations or refractory cases. In recent years, biceps tenodesis and tenotomy have become the mainstays of operative treatment. Management of biceps lesions must also involve consideration of other shoulder pathology, as they are often not an isolated finding. Although there remains debate on the best treatment options for long head of the biceps injuries, a review of current literature provides important principles that can help guide clinical decision making.

Clinical Evaluation of an Arthroscopic Knotless Suprapectoral Biceps Tenodesis Technique: Loop 'n' Tack Tenodesis

Background:

Pathology of the long head of the biceps tendon is a well-known cause of shoulder pain that is commonly managed with arthroscopic suprapectoral biceps tenodesis when conservative treatment fails.

Purpose:

To present an arthroscopic knotless suprapectoral biceps tenodesis technique known as “Loop ’n’ Tack” tenodesis and to report the clinical outcomes of patients with a minimum 2 years of follow-up.

Study Design:

Case series; Level of evidence, 4.

Methods:

A retrospective review of all patients who had undergone Loop ’n’ Tack tenodesis between January 2009 and May 2014 was completed. Charts were reviewed, and patients were contacted for demographic data, time from surgery, concomitant procedures, and workers’ compensation status, as well as visual analog scale for pain, American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES), Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation, and University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) scores.

Results:

Complete follow-up evaluations were performed for 59 of 68 patients (87%). Mean follow-up was 43 months. A majority (88%) of patients had at least 1 additional procedure performed at the time of biceps tenodesis. The mean ASES shoulder score improved from 42.6 preoperatively to 91.0 postoperatively (P < .001), and 54 of 59 patients (91.5%) had a good/excellent outcome, with a UCLA shoulder score >27 and ASES shoulder score >70. Three patients (5%) reported biceps cramping pain with overuse, and 2 (3.3%) reported intermittent anterior shoulder pain. No patients had developed a “Popeye” deformity at final clinical examination, and 97% reported that they were overall satisfied with the procedure.

Conclusion:

The Loop ’n’ Tack tenodesis technique results in a high rate of patient satisfaction, significant improvement in shoulder outcome scores, and a low incidence of postoperative pain, with no reoperations for biceps-related pathology.

Open subpectoral biceps tenodesis in patients over 65 does not result in an increased rate of complications

Background

Long head biceps tendon pathology is a common cause of anterior shoulder pain and is often associated with other shoulder conditions, such as rotator cuff tears and osteoarthritis. It is well accepted that older patients are at increased risk for major and minor peri- and postoperative complications.

The purpose of this study is to investigate patients over 65 years old who underwent subpectoral biceps tenodesis and compare the complication rates of this group to those of patients younger than 65 years old. The hypothesis is, that there would be no difference in complication rates and that clinical outcome scores for patients over 65 were satisfying and showed improvements over time.

Methods

There were 337 patients who underwent open subpectoral biceps tenodesis, between January 2005 and June 2015, 23 were identified as being over the age of 65 with a minimum follow up of 12 months. All patients over the age of 65 were evaluated pre- and postoperatively using Simple Shoulder Test (SST), American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES), Constant-Murley (CM) and Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (SANE). Intraoperative and postoperative adverse events (fracture, infection, wound opening, rupture/failure and neurovascular injuries) related to the tenodesis procedure and to the surgery itself were collected from all 337 patients in a routine postoperative follow-up.

Results

The under 65 group (range 27–64 years) at an average follow up (FU) of 30 months (range 12–91 months) showed a 5.4% (17 out of 314) post-operative complication rate related to the subpectoral tenodesis, whereas the group over 65 (range 65–77 years) at an average follow up of 33 months (range 12–79 months) showed an 8.7% (2 out of 23) complication rate.

Conclusion

This study demonstrates that in patients over the age of 65, biceps tenodesis is a successful procedure when performed for biceps tendinopathy and concomitantly with other surgical procedures of the shoulder, and does not result in an increased rate of complications when compared to a group of patients under the age of 65.

MRI to Arthroscopy Correlations in SLAP Lesions and Long Head Biceps Pathology

Superior labral anterior and posterior lesions and long head biceps injury are 2 common sources of shoulder pain. The presenting complaints and physical examination findings for these etiologies are often nonspecific, making diagnosis challenging. Further complicating their diagnoses, these 2 pathologies often cooccur together or with other shoulder pathologies such as subacromial bursitis, rotator cuff tear, and shoulder instability. However, with advancement in magnetic resonance imaging and shoulder arthroscopy techniques the ability to diagnose and treat these pathologies has vastly improved over the past 30 years. This review provides a case-based description of the correlation between magnetic resonance imaging and arthroscopic findings in common superior labral anterior and posterior and long head biceps injury, accompanied with current management strategies.

Physical examination tests and imaging studies based on arthroscopic assessment of the long head of biceps tendon are invalid

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to evaluate whether glenohumeral arthroscopy is an appropriate gold standard for the diagnosis of long head of biceps (LHB) tendon pathology. The objectives were to evaluate whether the length of tendon that can be seen at arthroscopy allows visualisation of areas of predilection of pathology and also to determine the rates of missed diagnoses at arthroscopy when compared to an open approach.

METHODS

A systematic review of cadaveric and clinical studies was performed. The search strategy was applied to MEDLINE, PubMed and Google Scholar databases. All relevant articles were included. Critical appraisal of clinical studies was performed using a validated quality assessment scale.

RESULTS

Five articles were identified for inclusion in the review. This included both clinical and cadaveric studies. The overall population comprised 18 cadaveric specimens and 575 patients. Out of the five included studies, three reported the length of LHB tendon visualised during arthroscopy and four reported the rate of missed LHB diagnosis. Cadaveric studies showed that the use of a hook probe allowed arthroscopic visualisation of between 34 and 48 % of the overall length of the LHB. In the clinical series, the rate of missed diagnoses at arthroscopy when compared to open exploration ranged between 33 and 49 %.

CONCLUSIONS

Arthroscopy allows visualisation of only a small part of the extra-articular LHB tendon. This leads to a high rate of missed pathology in the distal part of the tendon. Published figures for sensitivities and specificities of common physical examination and imaging tests for LHB pathology that are based on arthroscopy as the gold standard are therefore invalid. In clinical practice, it is important to note that a "negative" arthroscopic assessment does not exclude a lesion of the LHB tendon as this technique does not allow visualisation of common sites of distal pathology.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV.

Subpectoral Biceps Tenodesis: Interference Screw and Cortical Button Fixation

Bicep tendon pathology often arises from chronic overuse injuries, acute trauma, or degenerative changes in the glenohumeral joint. These injuries can cause significant shoulder pain, and can greatly limit range of motion and, in turn, activities of daily living. The diagnosis of biceps pathologies can be challenging, because patients often present with nonspecific symptoms. Some bicep tendon pathologies may be treated nonoperatively; however, biceps tendon subluxation and the presence of rotator cuff or SLAP lesions require surgical management. One of the options for the treatment of bicep tendon pathology includes miniopen subpectoral biceps tenodesis. The purpose of this Technical Note is to describe in detail our preferred operative technique for miniopen subpectoral biceps tenodesis with 2 different fixation methods.

Arthroscopic proximal versus open subpectoral biceps tenodesis with arthroscopic repair of small- or medium-sized rotator cuff tears

PURPOSE

The study was aimed to compare arthroscopic proximal biceps tenodesis and open subpectoral biceps tenodesis in repair of small or medium rotator cuff tears.

METHODS

Eighty-five patients underwent biceps tenodesis with arthroscopic repair of a rotator cuff tear, and 66 patients were followed for median of 26.8 (18-42) months with ultrasonography were reviewed. The arthroscopic biceps tenodesis group included 34 cases, and the open subpectoral biceps group included 32 cases. Patients were evaluated using visual analogue scale (VAS), American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES), and constant scores. Rotator cuff repair and fixation of the biceps tendon were assessed by ultrasonography. Fixation failure and degree of deformity were evaluated by the pain in the bicipital groove and biceps apex distance (BAD).

RESULTS

VAS score and tenderness at the bicipital groove decreased significantly in the open subpectoral group at 3 months postoperative. In both groups, the range of motion, ASES score, and constant score increased significantly (P < 0.05). Rotator cuff retear occurred in three cases (8.8 %) in the arthroscopic group and two cases in the open subpectoral group (6.2 %). There was no significant difference in BAD between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

There was no difference between open subpectoral tenodesis and arthroscopic proximal tenodesis at the time of the final follow-up; however, open subpectoral tenodesis showed encouraging results at 3-month follow-up. This early result of subpectoral tenodesis was related to removing most part of biceps tendinitis and using intra-bicipital groove tenodesis technique.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III.

Comparison of Treatments for Superior Labrum-Biceps Complex Lesions With Concomitant Rotator Cuff Repair: A Prospective, Randomized, Comparative Analysis of Debridement, Biceps Tenotomy, and Biceps Tenodesis

PURPOSE

To compare the clinical outcomes in patients with concomitant superior labrum-biceps complex (SLBC) lesions and rotator cuff tears who underwent arthroscopic rotator cuff repair, according to 3 different treatment methods (simple debridement, biceps tenotomy, or biceps tenodesis) for the SLBC lesions.

METHODS

One hundred twenty patients who underwent arthroscopic rotator cuff repair with SLBC lesions (biceps partial tears <50%, partial pulley lesions, and type II SLAP lesions) were enrolled in this prospective comparative study and randomly assigned to 1 of 3 treatment groups (simple debridement [Deb], biceps tenotomy only [BTo], or biceps tenodesis with one suture anchor [BTd]). Patients with isolated subscapularis tears or osteoarthritis were excluded. Finally, 86 patients (Deb in 28, BTo in 27, and BTd in 31) were analyzed (mean follow-up, 22.1 ± 7.72 months; mean age, 58.98 ± 7.8 years). Pain; functional, clinical, and radiologic outcomes; and the strength index of elbow flexion and forearm supination were analyzed.

RESULTS

Pain, range of motion, and functional scores significantly improved postoperatively in all 3 groups, with no significant differences across groups. At the 6-month follow-up, 8 patients reported cramping pain (5 Deb patients, 2 BTo patients, and 1 BTd patient), but the pain improved in most patients over time (with cramping pain reported by zero Deb patients, 1 BTo patient, and 1 BTd patient at final follow-up). Bicipital groove tenderness significantly improved in the BTo group postoperatively (P = .006). The Popeye deformity was noted in 10 patients (37.0%) in the BTo group, 8 (25.8%) in the BTd group, and only 2 (7.1%) in the Deb group (P = .029). On radiologic examination, the presence of tenodesis of the biceps tendons on the bicipital groove showed low agreement with the presence of the Popeye deformity (observed in 13 of 20 patients with the deformity, 65%). On strength index analysis, the BTo group showed lower forearm supination strength (0.877 ± 0.44) compared with that in the other groups (1.29 ± 0.525 in the Deb group and 1.12 ± 0.451 in the BTd group, P = .049).

CONCLUSIONS

All 3 treatments improved pain and function. Simple debridement showed the lowest risk of the Popeye deformity and preserved forearm supination strength. Biceps tenotomy and tenodesis may be preferable for selected patients: biceps tenotomy for patients with definite bicipital groove tenderness and biceps tenodesis for patients, especially male patients, with bicipital groove tenderness who want to preserve supination strength.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level II, prospective comparative study.

Qualitative Assessment and Quantitative Analysis of the Long Head of the Biceps Tendon in Relation to the Pectoralis Major Tendon Humeral Insertion: An Anatomic Study

PURPOSE

To qualitatively assess and to quantitatively analyze the long head of the biceps tendon (LHBT) in the region of the pectoralis major (PM).

METHODS

From 11 fresh cadaveric donors, 20 cadaveric shoulders without operative scars were dissected-mean age, 76.9 years (range, 61 to 93 years); male, 75%; left-sided, 55%; mean height, 67.8 inches (range, 61 to 71 inches); mean weight, 148.1 pounds (range, 106 to 176 pounds). Two specimens with discovered ruptures were excluded. The LHBT circumference was measured at the anterior edge of supraspinatus, suprapectorally, midpectorally, and subpectorally. The muscle was then removed from the LHBT and the circumference was again measured at the supra-, mid-, and subpectoral levels. These data were used to calculate the area of the tendon. All measurements were performed by 2 independent observers. Statistical analysis was performed to assess reliability of data and the difference between serial measurements.

RESULTS

The mean calculated percentage tendon decreased from 86.7% at the superior edge of the PM to 49.8% at the midpoint of the PM and to 17.5% at the inferior edge of the PM.

CONCLUSIONS

Distal to the PM, the LHBT was composed of a small percentage of tendon to muscle, which may have implications for the mechanical strength of fixation of tenodesis. The anatomic location of the musculotendinous junction of the LHBT began proximal to the superior edge of the PM tendon, which implies that restoration of anatomic tensioning may require a more proximal docking site than previously described. Tenodesis performed between the midpoint of the PM insertion and more distal points involves a significant portion of muscle, which may not be optimal.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Tenodesis performed between the midpoint of the PM insertion and more distal points involves a significant portion of muscle, which may affect the mechanical strength or optimal choice of fixation location.

Biceps Lesion Associated With Rotator Cuff Tears: Open Subpectoral and Arthroscopic Intracuff Tenodesis

Background:

Various tenodesis methods are being used for long head of the biceps tendon lesions. However, there is no consensus on the most appropriate surgical method.

Hypothesis:

There are significant differences in incidence of cosmetic deformity and persistent bicipital pain between open subpectoral and arthroscopic intracuff tenodesis groups.

Study Design:

Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3.

Methods:

This study included 72 patients who underwent biceps tenodesis and rotator cuff repair between January 2009 and May 2014 and who were followed for at least 1 year. Open subpectoral tenodesis was performed in 39 patients (group A), and arthroscopic intracuff tenodesis was performed in 33 patients (group B).

Results:

In group A, the mean visual analog scale (VAS) score for pain during motion and mean University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) and Constant scores significantly improved from 4.6, 18.6, and 64.5 preoperatively to 1.9, 30.5, and 86.5 at last follow-up, respectively (P < .001 for all). In group B, these scores significantly improved from 5.1, 17.6, and 62.9 preoperatively to 1.8, 31.5, and 85.9 at last follow-up, respectively (P < .001 for all). Popeye deformity was noted in 2 (5.2%) patients from group A and 5 (15.6%) patients from group B (P = .231). Additionally, persistent bicipital tenderness was noted in 1 (2.6%) patient from group A and 8 (24.2%) patients from group B (P = .012).

Conclusion:

Both open subpectoral tenodesis and arthroscopic intracuff tenodesis show good clinical outcomes for long head of the biceps tendon lesions. However, open subpectoral tenodesis may be more appropriate, considering the low incidence of Popeye deformity and tenderness.

Rupture of the Long Head of the Biceps Tendon in a Pediatric Athlete: A Case Report

CASE

We report a case of an adolescent athlete who sustained an isolated rupture of the long head of the biceps tendon and was subsequently treated with subpectoral biceps tenodesis.

CONCLUSION

Provided that there is no damage to the rotator cuff, an open biceps tenodesis may be performed in this young patient population with good short-term outcomes and return to full activity.

Systematic Review of Biceps Tenodesis: Arthroscopic Versus Open

PURPOSE

We present a systematic review of the recent literature regarding the use of arthroscopic and open methods of tenodesis for lesions of the long head of the biceps brachii and present an analysis of the subjective and objective outcomes after these 2 procedures.

METHODS

PubMed was carefully reviewed for suitable articles relating to biceps tenodesis, both open and arthroscopic. We included studies reporting on the clinical outcomes of these 2 procedures that were of Level I to IV evidence and were published in the English language. The primary clinical outcomes for each study were determined, normalized, and reported as the percentage of good or excellent results versus poor results based on the outcome scores and criteria laid out by the authors in each of the studies. The exclusion criteria included studies in which biceps tenodesis was performed in patients with concomitant rotator cuff repairs, nonhuman studies, and biomechanical studies.

RESULTS

A total of 16 studies met our inclusion criteria. Among all studies, a total of 205 arthroscopic tenodesis procedures and a total of 271 open tenodesis procedures were performed. Among the 271 open tenodesis patients, 98% had a good or excellent outcome, with a poor outcome in 5 patients (2%). Among the 205 patients who underwent arthroscopic tenodesis, 98% had a good or excellent outcome, with a poor outcome in 5 patients (2%).

CONCLUSIONS

Both open and arthroscopic biceps tenodesis provided satisfactory outcomes in most patients, and there were no identifiable differences in this review.

Torsional Fracture of the Humerus after Subpectoral Biceps Tenodesis with an Interference Screw: A Biomechanical Cadaveric Study

BACKGROUND

Humeral fracture following subpectoral biceps tenodesis has been previously reported; however, there are no published biomechanical studies reporting the resulting torsional strength of the humerus. Our purpose was to determine if there is an increased risk of humerus fracture after subpectoral biceps tenodesis with an interference screw and to determine if screw size is also a factor. We hypothesized that limbs receiving the procedure would have reduced failure torque and rotation under external rotation compared to untreated controls and that the larger screw size would result in inferior mechanical properties compared to the smaller.

METHODS

Twenty matched pairs of embalmed cadaveric humeri were subjected to subpectoral biceps tenodesis using either a 6.25 or 8.0mm interference screw, with the untreated contralateral limb serving as a control. Each humerus was mechanically tested in torsional external rotation to failure.

FINDINGS

Maximum torque and rotation to failure were reduced in the tenodesis group compared to controls; however, there was no difference between screw sizes. When both screw sizes were combined into a single group, paired t-tests also showed similar differences.

INTERPRETATION

Based on our experiment, there is an increased risk for humerus spiral fracture when subjected to torsional external rotation after subpectoral biceps tenodesis with an interference screw compared to an intact humerus; however, there is not a significant difference between a 6.25mm and 8.0mm screw. Surgeons may elect to use alternative fixation methods in patients at high risk (e.g., overhead throwing athletes, etc.) for torsional loads and fracture.