Repair of distal biceps tendon acute ruptures with two suture anchors and anterior mini-open single incision technique: clinical follow-up and isokinetic evaluation

Gasparella, A.; Katusic, D.; Perissinotto, A; Miti, Andrea

doi:10.1007/s12306-014-0314-3

Cited by 13 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 39 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Our present study shows that clinical outcomes are comparable to those reported previously in the literature 1,7,9,17,19,24 (see Table 2). All patients regained full elbow range of motion at an average of 5.4 months and demonstrated satisfactory functionality with an average QuickDASH score of 6.5.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 91%

Single Incision Distal Biceps Repair With Hemi-Krackow Suture Technique

Goljan

Patel

Stull

et al. 2016

Hand (New York, N,Y.)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 91%

Single Incision Distal Biceps Repair With Hemi-Krackow Suture Technique

Goljan

Patel

Stull

et al. 2016

Hand (New York, N,Y.)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Early diagnosis and repair are preferred. 31,38,39 All studies demonstrated good to excellent results when evaluating the DASH score, the Mayo Elbow Performance Score (MEPS) and Morrey Elbow Score (MES) further justifying the utility of surgical fixation. Since Morrey et al's 51 original report on outcomes of distal biceps repairs in which 97% of flexion strength and 95% of supination strength were restored, many other studies have been reported in the literature.…”

Section: Results Of Operative Treatmentmentioning

confidence: 98%

An update on distal biceps tendon ruptures

Chebli¹

2015

Current Orthopaedic Practice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The incidence of distal biceps ruptures is 1.2/100,000 people per year. It is most commonly seen in men 40--60 yr old involving their dominant arm. The mechanism of injury is the application of an eccentric load to the elbow region. Some report a preceding tendinitis, which speaks to the degenerative changes and decrease in vascularity as contributing factors to the tendon rupture. Nonoperative treatment is an option. However, most younger, healthy, and active patients benefit from early surgical management to regain supination and flexion strength. Chronic and retracted tears also may benefit from surgical fixation. Many new techniques have been described and studied recently. However, they present a different set of challenges to the treating surgeon. With this influx of operative techniques and further study of accepted techniques, new light has been shed on the outcomes and complication profiles of distal biceps tendon repairs. The postoperative course of these repairs also has changed to early motion and earlier return to full activity with increased confidence in fixation techniques.

show abstract

“…The checklist consists of 27 questions, with a total possible score of 28 for randomized studies and 25 for nonrandomized studies. Downs and Black score ranges were given corresponding quality levels according to previous literature: excellent (26)(27)(28), good (20)(21)(22)(23)(24)(25), fair (15)(16)(17)(18)(19), and poor (14). Only randomized studies could achieve a quality level of excellent according to the scoring method of the Downs and Black checklist.…”

Section: Assessment Of Risk Of Bias and Quality Of Evidencementioning

confidence: 99%

Operative Versus Nonoperative Management for Distal Biceps Brachii Tendon Lesions: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Cuzzolin

Secco

Guerra

et al. 2021

Orthopaedic Journal of Sports Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Both nonoperative and operative treatments have been proposed to manage distal biceps brachii tendon avulsions. However, the advantages and disadvantages of these approaches have not been properly quantified. Purpose: To summarize the current literature on both nonoperative and operative approaches for distal biceps brachii tendon ruptures and to quantify results and limitations. The advantages and disadvantages of the different surgical strategies were investigated as well. Study Design: Systematic review; Level of evidence, 4. Methods: A systematic literature search was performed in March 2020 using PubMed Central, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, Iscrctn.com , clinicaltrials.gov , greylit.org , opengrey.eu , and Scopus literature databases. All human studies evaluating the clinical outcome of nonoperative treatment as well as different surgical techniques were included. The influence of the treatment approach was assessed in terms of the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) score and the Mayo Elbow Performance Index; extension, flexion, supination, and pronation range of motion (ROM); and flexion and supination strength ratio between the injured and uninjured arms. Risk of bias and quality of evidence were assessed using the Cochrane guidelines. Results: Of 1275 studies, 53 studies (N = 1380 patients) matched the inclusion criteria. The results of the meta-analysis comparing operative versus nonoperative approaches for distal biceps tendon avulsion showed significant differences in favor of surgery in terms of DASH score ( P = .02), Mayo Elbow Performance Index ( P < .001), flexion strength (94.7% vs 83.0%, respectively; P < .001), and supination strength (89.2% vs 62.6%, respectively; P < .001). The surgical approach presented 10% heterotopic ossifications, 10% transient sensory nerve injuries, 1.6% transient motor nerve injuries, and a 0.1% rate of persistent motorial disorders. Comparison of the different surgical techniques showed similar results for the fixation methods, whereas the single-incision technique led to a better pronation ROM versus the double-incision approach (81.5° vs 76.1°, respectively; P = .01). Conclusion: The results of this meta-analysis showed the superiority of surgical management over the nonoperative approach for distal biceps tendon detachment, with superior flexion and supination strength and better patient-reported outcomes. The single-incision surgical approach demonstrated a slightly better pronation ROM compared with the double-incision approach, whereas all fixation methods led to similar outcomes.

show abstract

Repair of distal biceps tendon acute ruptures with two suture anchors and anterior mini-open single incision technique: clinical follow-up and isokinetic evaluation

Abstract: Our study shows that mini-open access and fixation with two suture anchors achieved in medium-term excellent functional and cosmetic results needed short rehabilitation times and is minimally invasive.

Cited by 13 publications

References 39 publications

Single Incision Distal Biceps Repair With Hemi-Krackow Suture Technique

Single Incision Distal Biceps Repair With Hemi-Krackow Suture Technique

An update on distal biceps tendon ruptures

Operative Versus Nonoperative Management for Distal Biceps Brachii Tendon Lesions: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About