Which Is Better for Arthroscopic Tenodesis of the Long Head of the Biceps: Soft Tissue or Bony Interference Fixation?

Hwang, Jung-Taek; Yang, Cheol Jung; Noh, Kyu Cheol; Yoo, Yon-Sik; Hyun, Yoon Suk; Lee, Yong Beom; Liu, Xiaoning

doi:10.1016/j.arthro.2015.10.024

Cited by 19 publications

(27 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“… 4 , 53 Although clinical and functional outcomes are generally satisfactory, the optimal biceps tenodesis technique is still widely debated in the literature. 1 , 13 , 28 , 35 Several clinical trials have directly compared the functional outcomes between different tenodesis techniques; however, a comparison of treatment outcomes and surgical complications was not possible because of low sample sizes. 21 , 61 A systematic review of aggregated cases can assess both the functional outcomes and the surgical complications as applied to a larger cohort of patients.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

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

Deng

Yin

Cusano

et al. 2020

Orthopaedic Journal of Sports Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

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.

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 99%

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

Deng

Yin

Cusano

et al. 2020

Orthopaedic Journal of Sports Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Improvement in this outcome measure is seen after shoulder biceps interference screw fixation versus soft-tissue tenodesis. 10…”

Section: This Knee Ligament Work To Control Rotation Alongmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cruciverbalist Challenge for Arthroscopic and Related Surgeons

Nguyen

Ochiai

2016

Arthroscopy: The Journal of Arthroscopic & Related Surgery

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Cruciverbalist Challenge for Arthroscopic and Related Surgeons C rosswords were first published in the United States more than 100 years ago. Crosswords offer a unique opportunity to reinforce passively acquired knowledge in an active learning capacity. This crossword puzzle was designed with the intention to appeal to and challenge arthroscopic surgeons. It tests their comprehension and retention of recent articles relating to arthroscopy. All clues and answers have references attached, citing either Arthroscopy or The American Journal of Sports Medicine. 1-24 Our hope is that if some clues seem difficult, the player may be motivated to review the cited article. Please find the Answer Key

show abstract

“…Hwang et al 6 in "Which Is Better for Arthroscopic Tenodesis of the Long Head of the Biceps: Soft Tissue or Bony Interference Fixation?" have answered these questions.…”

Section: See Related Article On Page 560mentioning

confidence: 99%

Editorial Commentary: To Screw or to Sew—Which Is Better for Arthroscopic Biceps Tenodesis?

Feldman¹

2016

Arthroscopy: The Journal of Arthroscopic & Related Surgery

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

As the popularity of arthroscopic biceps tenodesis continues to grow, surgeons must choose between performing a soft-tissue tenodesis and performing a bony tenodesis. Although there is no difference in visual analog scale, Constant, or American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons scores at greater than 2 years' follow-up, elbow flexion strength index and fixation failure rates favor bony tenodesis, important factors to consider when deciding which procedure to perform.

show abstract

Which Is Better for Arthroscopic Tenodesis of the Long Head of the Biceps: Soft Tissue or Bony Interference Fixation?

Cited by 19 publications

References 21 publications

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

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

Cruciverbalist Challenge for Arthroscopic and Related Surgeons

Editorial Commentary: To Screw or to Sew—Which Is Better for Arthroscopic Biceps Tenodesis?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About