“…Revision methods and outcomes for failed tenodesis are not well studied, and previous studies have had variable results. 12 , 13 One method is revision tenodesis through a subpectoral approach, with some studies showing patient satisfaction ranging from 88% to 100% with improvements in Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation, American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) score, and visual analog scale (VAS) for pain. 8 , 12 Despite these results, other studies have shown complication rates as high as 48%, with additional operations required in 4% of cases.…”