Top

Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery

Published in:

01-01-2018 | Arthroscopy and Sports Medicine

Clinical and sonographic evaluation of subpectoral biceps tenodesis with a dual suture anchor technique demonstrates improved outcomes and a low failure rate at a minimum 2-year follow-up

Authors: Matthijs Jacxsens, Erin K. Granger, Robert Z. Tashjian

Published in: Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery | Issue 1/2018

Abstract

Introduction

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the clinical outcomes and integrity of an open subpectoral biceps tenodesis using a dual suture anchor construct.

Materials and methods

Patients with at least 2 years of follow-up were retrospectively evaluated for simple shoulder test (SST), American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) score, and visual analog scales (VAS) for pain, function and satisfaction. A physical exam assessed shoulder range of motion and elbow strength. Ultrasonography visualized construct integrity.

Results

Of 43 eligible patients, 36 completed questionnaire evaluation and 22 completed an additional physical examination. Indications included superior labral anterior–posterior (SLAP) lesions (4), partial thickness tears (6), instability (6), and tenosynovitis of the biceps tendon (20). Eighteen patients (50%) had an associated rotator cuff tear. Patient-reported outcomes improved pre- vs postoperatively: ASES score (45.4 vs 78.6, P < 0.001), SST (5.1 vs 9.6, P < 0.001), pain-VAS (4.8 vs 2.0, P < 0.001), and function-VAS (4.9 vs 2.3, P < 0.001). Satisfaction-VAS was 8.3 postoperatively. Patient-reported outcomes did not differ for patients with an associated rotator cuff tear compared to those without (P ≥ 0.427). None of the physical exam measures were lower on the operative side compared to the healthy side (P ≥ 0.516). Sonographic evaluation revealed preserved integrity of the tenodesis construct in all cases. No complications were noted.

Conclusions

Subpectoral biceps tenodesis utilizing a dual suture anchor technique is a treatment option for SLAP lesions, partial thickness tears, subluxation, and tenosynovitis of the long head of the biceps with high rates of postoperative patient satisfaction, a low failure rate, and improved outcome scores. The presence of a concomitant rotator cuff tear did not influence clinical outcomes.

Gottschalk MB, Karas SG, Ghattas TN, Burdette R (2014) Subpectoral biceps tenodesis for the treatment of type II and IV superior labral anterior and posterior lesions. Am J Sports Med 42(9):2128–2135. doi:10.1177/0363546514540273 PubMedCrossRef

Gombera MM, Kahlenberg CA, Nair R, Saltzman MD, Terry MA (2015) All-arthroscopic suprapectoral versus open subpectoral tenodesis of the long head of the biceps brachii. Am J Sports Med 43(5):1077–1083. doi:10.1177/0363546515570024 PubMedCrossRef

Werner BC, Evans CL, Holzgrefe RE, Tuman JM, Hart JM, Carson EW, Diduch DR, Miller MD, Brockmeier SF (2014) Arthroscopic suprapectoral and open subpectoral biceps tenodesis: a comparison of minimum 2-year clinical outcomes. Am J Sports Med 42(11):2583–2590. doi:10.1177/0363546514547226 PubMedCrossRef

Green JM, Getelman MH, Snyder SJ, Burns JP (2016) All-Arthroscopic suprapectoral versus open subpectoral tenodesis of the long head of the biceps brachii without the use of interference screws. Arthroscopy. doi:10.1016/j.arthro.2016.07.007

Gurnani N, van Deurzen DF, Janmaat VT, van den Bekerom MP (2015) Tenotomy or tenodesis for pathology of the long head of the biceps brachii: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. doi:10.1007/s00167-015-3640-6 PubMed

Nho SJ, Strauss EJ, Lenart BA, Provencher MT, Mazzocca AD, Verma NN, Romeo AA (2010) Long head of the biceps tendinopathy: diagnosis and management. J Am Acad Orthop Surg 18(11):645–656PubMedCrossRef

Abraham VT, Tan BH, Kumar VP (2016) Systematic review of biceps tenodesis: arthroscopic versus open. Arthroscopy 32(2):365–371. doi:10.1016/j.arthro.2015.07.028 PubMedCrossRef

Scheibel M, Schroder RJ, Chen JH, Bartschy M (2011) Arthroscopic soft tissue tenodesis versus bony fixation anchor tenodesis of the long head of the biceps tendon. Am J Sports Med 39(5):1046–1052. doi:10.1177/0363546510390777 PubMedCrossRef

Lee HJ, Jeong JY, Kim CK, Kim YS (2016) Surgical treatment of lesions of the long head of the biceps brachii tendon with rotator cuff tear: a prospective randomized clinical trial comparing the clinical results of tenotomy and tenodesis. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 25(7):1107–1114. doi:10.1016/j.jse.2016.02.006 PubMedCrossRef

10.

Koh KH, Ahn JH, Kim SM, Yoo JC (2010) Treatment of biceps tendon lesions in the setting of rotator cuff tears: prospective cohort study of tenotomy versus tenodesis. Am J Sports Med 38(8):1584–1590. doi:10.1177/0363546510364053 PubMedCrossRef

11.

Mazzocca AD, Cote MP, Arciero CL, Romeo AA, Arciero RA (2008) Clinical outcomes after subpectoral biceps tenodesis with an interference screw. Am J Sports Med 36(10):1922–1929. doi:10.1177/0363546508318192 PubMedCrossRef

12.

Sampatacos N, Getelman MH, Henninger HB (2014) Biomechanical comparison of two techniques for arthroscopic suprapectoral biceps tenodesis: interference screw versus implant-free intraosseous tendon fixation. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 23(11):1731–1739. doi:10.1016/j.jse.2014.02.027 PubMedCrossRef

13.

Golish SR, Caldwell PE 3rd, Miller MD, Singanamala N, Ranawat AS, Treme G, Pearson SE, Costic R, Sekiya JK (2008) Interference screw versus suture anchor fixation for subpectoral tenodesis of the proximal biceps tendon: a cadaveric study. Arthroscopy 24(10):1103–1108. doi:10.1016/j.arthro.2008.05.005 PubMedCrossRef

14.

Patzer T, Santo G, Olender GD, Wellmann M, Hurschler C, Schofer MD (2012) Suprapectoral or subpectoral position for biceps tenodesis: biomechanical comparison of four different techniques in both positions. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 21(1):116–125. doi:10.1016/j.jse.2011.01.022 PubMedCrossRef

15.

Sethi PM, Rajaram A, Beitzel K, Hackett TR, Chowaniec DM, Mazzocca AD (2013) Biomechanical performance of subpectoral biceps tenodesis: a comparison of interference screw fixation, cortical button fixation, and interference screw diameter. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 22(4):451–457. doi:10.1016/j.jse.2012.03.016 PubMedCrossRef

16.

Chiang FL, Hong CK, Chang CH, Lin CL, Jou IM, Su WR (2016) Biomechanical comparison of all-suture anchor fixation and interference screw technique for subpectoral biceps tenodesis. Arthroscopy 32(7):1247–1252. doi:10.1016/j.arthro.2016.01.016 PubMedCrossRef

17.

Nho SJ, Reiff SN, Verma NN, Slabaugh MA, Mazzocca AD, Romeo AA (2010) Complications associated with subpectoral biceps tenodesis: low rates of incidence following surgery. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 19(5):764–768. doi:10.1016/j.jse.2010.01.024 PubMedCrossRef

18.

McCormick F, Nwachukwu BU, Solomon D, Dewing C, Golijanin P, Gross DJ, Provencher MT (2014) The efficacy of biceps tenodesis in the treatment of failed superior labral anterior posterior repairs. Am J Sports Med 42(4):820–825. doi:10.1177/0363546513520122 PubMedCrossRef

19.

Gupta AK, Chalmers PN, Klosterman EL, Harris JD, Bach BR Jr, Verma NN, Cole BJ, Romeo AA (2015) Subpectoral biceps tenodesis for bicipital tendonitis with SLAP tear. Orthopedics 38(1):e48–e53. doi:10.3928/01477447-20150105-60 PubMedCrossRef

20.

Koch BS, Burks RT (2012) Failure of biceps tenodesis with interference screw fixation. Arthroscopy 28(5):735–740. doi:10.1016/j.arthro.2012.02.019 PubMedCrossRef

21.

Reiff SN, Nho SJ, Romeo AA (2010) Proximal humerus fracture after keyhole biceps tenodesis. Am J Orthop (Belle Mead NJ) 39(7):E61–E63

22.

Sears BW, Spencer EE, Getz CL (2011) Humeral fracture following subpectoral biceps tenodesis in 2 active, healthy patients. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 20(6):e7–11. doi:10.1016/j.jse.2011.02.020 PubMedCrossRef

23.

Tashjian RZ, Henninger HB (2013) Biomechanical evaluation of subpectoral biceps tenodesis: dual suture anchor versus interference screw fixation. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 22(10):1408–1412. doi:10.1016/j.jse.2012.12.039 PubMedCrossRef

24.

Park JS, Kim SH, Jung HJ, Lee YH, Oh JH (2017) A prospective randomized study comparing the interference screw and suture anchor techniques for biceps tenodesis. Am J Sports Med 45(2):440–448. doi:10.1177/0363546516667577 PubMedCrossRef

25.

Kerschbaum M, Scheuermann M, Gerhardt C, Scheibel M (2016) Arthroscopic knotless suprapectoral tenodesis of the long head of biceps: clinical and structural results. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 136(8):1135–1142. doi:10.1007/s00402-016-2466-0 PubMedCrossRef

26.

Denard PJ, Dai X, Hanypsiak BT, Burkhart SS (2012) Anatomy of the biceps tendon: implications for restoring physiological length-tension relation during biceps tenodesis with interference screw fixation. Arthroscopy 28(10):1352–1358. doi:10.1016/j.arthro.2012.04.143 PubMedCrossRef

27.

Millett PJ, Sanders B, Gobezie R, Braun S, Warner JJ (2008) Interference screw vs. suture anchor fixation for open subpectoral biceps tenodesis: does it matter? BMC Musculoskelet Disord 9:121. doi:10.1186/1471-2474-9-121 PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef

28.

Nho SJ, Frank RM, Reiff SN, Verma NN, Romeo AA (2010) Arthroscopic repair of anterosuperior rotator cuff tears combined with open biceps tenodesis. Arthroscopy 26(12):1667–1674. doi:10.1016/j.arthro.2010.04.008 PubMedCrossRef

29.

Ek ET, Shi LL, Tompson JD, Freehill MT, Warner JJ (2014) Surgical treatment of isolated type II superior labrum anterior-posterior (SLAP) lesions: repair versus biceps tenodesis. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 23(7):1059–1065. doi:10.1016/j.jse.2013.09.030 PubMedCrossRef

30.

Tangari M, Carbone S, Gallo M, Campi A (2011) Long head of the biceps tendon rupture in professional wrestlers: treatment with a mini-open tenodesis. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 20(3):409–413. doi:10.1016/j.jse.2010.08.008 PubMedCrossRef

31.

Uschok S, Herrmann S, Pauly S, Perka C, Greiner S (2016) Combined arthroscopic tenodesis of the long head of biceps and rotator cuff repair in antero-superior cuff tears. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 136(9):1273–1279. doi:10.1007/s00402-016-2498-5 PubMedCrossRef

32.

Lee HI, Shon MS, Koh KH, Lim TK, Heo J, Yoo JC (2014) Clinical and radiologic results of arthroscopic biceps tenodesis with suture anchor in the setting of rotator cuff tear. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 23(3):e53–e60. doi:10.1016/j.jse.2013.06.004 PubMedCrossRef

33.

Shen J, Gao QF, Zhang Y, He YH (2014) Arthroscopic tenodesis through positioning portals to treat proximal lesions of the biceps tendon. Cell Biochem Biophys 70(3):1499–1506. doi:10.1007/s12013-014-0071-9 PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef

34.

Codsi MJ, Rodeo SA, Scalise JJ, Moorehead TM, Ma CB (2014) Assessment of rotator cuff repair integrity using ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging in a multicenter study. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 23(10):1468–1472. doi:10.1016/j.jse.2014.01.045 PubMedCrossRef

35.

Collin P, Yoshida M, Delarue A, Lucas C, Jossaume T, Ladermann A, French Society for S, Elbow (2015) Evaluating postoperative rotator cuff healing: prospective comparison of MRI and ultrasound. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res 101(6 Suppl):S265–S268. doi:10.1016/j.otsr.2015.06.006 PubMedCrossRef

36.

Thakkar RS, Thakkar SC, Srikumaran U, McFarland EG, Fayad LM (2014) Complications of rotator cuff surgery-the role of post-operative imaging in patient care. Br J Radiol 87(1039):20130630. doi:10.1259/bjr.20130630 PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef

37.

Kolz CW, Suter T, Henninger HB (2015) Regional mechanical properties of the long head of the biceps tendon. Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon) 30(9):940–945. doi:10.1016/j.clinbiomech.2015.07.005 CrossRef

38.

Moon SC, Cho NS, Rhee YG (2015) Analysis of “hidden lesions” of the extra-articular biceps after subpectoral biceps tenodesis: the subpectoral portion as the optimal tenodesis site. Am J Sports Med 43(1):63–68. doi:10.1177/0363546514554193 PubMedCrossRef

39.

Lutton DM, Gruson KI, Harrison AK, Gladstone JN, Flatow EL (2011) Where to tenodese the biceps: proximal or distal? Clin Orthop Relat Res 469(4):1050–1055. doi:10.1007/s11999-010-1691-z PubMedCrossRef

40.

Gilmer BB, DeMers AM, Guerrero D, Reid JB 3rd, Lubowitz JH, Guttmann D (2015) Arthroscopic versus open comparison of long head of biceps tendon visualization and pathology in patients requiring tenodesis. Arthroscopy 31(1):29–34. doi:10.1016/j.arthro.2014.07.025 PubMedCrossRef

41.

Chung SW, Huong CB, Kim SH, Oh JH (2013) Shoulder stiffness after rotator cuff repair: risk factors and influence on outcome. Arthroscopy 29(2):290–300. doi:10.1016/j.arthro.2012.08.023 PubMedCrossRef

42.

Shin SJ, Chung J, Lee J, Ko YW (2016) Recovery of muscle strength after intact arthroscopic rotator cuff repair according to preoperative rotator cuff tear size. Am J Sports Med 44(4):972–980. doi:10.1177/0363546515625043 PubMedCrossRef

43.

Tashjian RZ, Deloach J, Green A, Porucznik CA, Powell AP (2010) Minimal clinically important differences in ASES and simple shoulder test scores after nonoperative treatment of rotator cuff disease. J Bone Jt Surg Am 92(2):296–303. doi:10.2106/JBJS.H.01296 CrossRef

44.

Kerschbaum M, Arndt L, Bartsch M, Chen J, Gerhardt C, Scheibel M (2016) Using the LHB score for assessment of LHB pathologies and LHB surgery: a prospective study. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 136(4):469–475. doi:10.1007/s00402-015-2391-7 PubMedCrossRef

Title: Clinical and sonographic evaluation of subpectoral biceps tenodesis with a dual suture anchor technique demonstrates improved outcomes and a low failure rate at a minimum 2-year follow-up
Authors: Matthijs Jacxsens
Erin K. Granger
Robert Z. Tashjian
Publication date: 01-01-2018
Publisher: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in: Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery / Issue 1/2018
Print ISSN: 0936-8051
Electronic ISSN: 1434-3916
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00402-017-2810-z

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

Springer Medicine

Clinical and sonographic evaluation of subpectoral biceps tenodesis with a dual suture anchor technique demonstrates improved outcomes and a low failure rate at a minimum 2-year follow-up

Abstract

Introduction

Materials and methods

Results

Conclusions

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Introduction

Materials and methods

Results

Conclusions

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 1/2018

Safe zones and a technical guide for cerclage wiring of the femur: a computed topographic angiogram (CTA) study

Does alignment of the limb and tibial width determine relative narrowing between compartments when planning mechanically aligned TKA?

Reverse shoulder arthroplasty in obese patients: analysis of functionality in the medium-term

Which factors are independent predictors of early recovery of mobility in the older adults’ population after hip fracture? A cohort prognostic study

Correction to: Insertion of the Ascension PyroCarbon PIP total joint in 152 human cadaver fingers: analysis of implant positions and malpositions

The neurological outcome of radiotherapy versus surgery in patients with metastatic spinal cord compression presenting with myelopathy