The rate and reporting of fracture after biceps tenodesis: A systematic review

Author(s):  
Hailey P. Huddleston ◽  
Joey S. Kurtzman ◽  
Samuel Gedailovich ◽  
Steven M. Koehler ◽  
William Aibinder
2020 ◽  
pp. 036354652092117 ◽  
Author(s):  
Travis L. Frantz ◽  
Andrew G. Shacklett ◽  
Adam S. Martin ◽  
Jonathan D. Barlow ◽  
Grant L. Jones ◽  
...  

Background: Superior labrum anterior-posterior (SLAP) lesion is a common shoulder injury, particularly in overhead athletes. While surgical management has traditionally consisted of SLAP repair, high rates of revision and complications have led to alternative techniques, such as biceps tenodesis (BT). While BT is commonly reserved for older nonoverhead athletes, indications for its use have expanded in recent years. Purpose: To determine functional outcomes and return-to-sport rates among overhead athletes after BT for SLAP tear. Study Design: Systematic review. Methods: A systematic review was performed for any articles published before July 2019. The search phrase “labral tear” was used to capture maximum results, followed by keyword inclusion of “SLAP tear” and “biceps tenodesis.” Inclusion criteria included outcome studies of BT for isolated SLAP tear in athletes participating in any overhead sports, not limited to throwing alone. Abstracts and manuscripts were independently reviewed to determine eligibility. When clearly delineated, outcome variables from multiple studies were combined. Results: After full review, 8 articles met inclusion criteria (99 athletes; mean age, 19.8-47 years), with baseball and softball players the most common among them (n = 62). Type II SLAP tear was the most common diagnosis, and 0% to 44% of athletes had a failed previous SLAP repair before undergoing BT. Only 1 study included patients with concomitant rotator cuff repair. Open subpectoral BT was most commonly used, and complication rates ranged from 0% to 14%, with wound erythema, traumatic biceps tendon rupture, brachial plexus neurapraxia, and adhesive capsulitis being reported. Combined reported postoperative functional scores were as follows: American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons, 81.7 to 97; 12-Item Short Form Health Survey physical, 50 to 54; visual analog scale for pain, 0.8-1.5; Kerlan Jobe Orthopaedic Clinic, 66 to 79; and satisfaction, 80% to 87%. The overall return-to-sports rate for overhead athletes was 70% (60 of 86). For studies that clearly delineated outcomes based on level of play/athlete, the combined return-to-sports rate was 69% (11 of 16) for recreational overhead athletes, 80% (4 of 5) for competitive/collegiate athletes, and 60% (18 of 30) for professionals. Conclusion: BT in the overhead athlete offers encouraging functional outcomes and return-to-sports rates, particularly in the recreational athlete. It can be successfully performed as an index operation rather than SLAP repair, as well as in a younger patient population. Careful consideration should be given to elite overhead athletes, particularly pitchers, who tend to experience poorer outcomes.


2020 ◽  
Vol 8 (8) ◽  
pp. 232596712094532
Author(s):  
Zi Jun Deng ◽  
Clark Yin ◽  
Joseph Cusano ◽  
Hussein Abdul-Rassoul ◽  
Emily J. Curry ◽  
...  

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.


Author(s):  
John W Belk ◽  
Stephen G Thon ◽  
John Hart ◽  
Eric C McCarty, Jr. ◽  
Eric C McCarty

ImportanceArthroscopic suprapectoral biceps tenodesis (ABT) and open subpectoral biceps tenodesis (OBT) are two surgical treatment options for relief of long head of the biceps tendon (LHBT) pathology and superior labrum anterior to posterior (SLAP) tears. There is insufficient knowledge regarding the clinical superiority of one technique over the other.ObjectiveTo systematically review the literature in order to compare the clinical outcomes and safety of ABT and OBT for treatment of LHBT or SLAP pathology.Evidence reviewA systematic review was performed by searching PubMed, the Cochrane Library and Embase to identify studies that compared the clinical efficacy of ABT versus OBT. The search phrase used was: (bicep OR biceps OR biceps brachii OR long head of biceps brachii OR biceps tendinopathy) AND (tenodesis). Patients were assessed based on the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Score, the visual analogue scale, the Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation, Constant-Murley Score, clinical failure, range of motion, bicipital groove pain and strength. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines were followed, and both the Cochrane Collaboration’s and Risk of Bias in Non-randomised Studies - of Interventions (ROBINS-I) risk of bias tools were used to evaluate risk of bias.FindingsEight studies (one level I, seven level III) met inclusion criteria, including 326 patients undergoing ABT and 381 patients undergoing OBT. No differences were found in treatment failure rates or patient-reported outcome scores between groups in any study. One study found OBT patients to experience significantly increased range of shoulder forward flexion when compared with ABT patients (p=0.049). Two studies found ABT patients to experience significantly more postoperative stiffness when compared with OBT patients (p<0.05).ConclusionsPatients undergoing ABT and OBT can be expected to experience similar improvements in clinical outcomes at latest follow-up without differences treatment failure or functional performance. ABT patients may experience an increased incidence of stiffness in the early postoperative period.Level of evidenceIII.


2020 ◽  
Vol 36 (12) ◽  
pp. 3081-3091 ◽  
Author(s):  
Travis J. Dekker ◽  
Liam A. Peebles ◽  
Fletcher R. Preuss ◽  
Brandon T. Goldenberg ◽  
Grant J. Dornan ◽  
...  

Orthopedics ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. 1-8
Author(s):  
Bhavik H. Patel ◽  
Avinesh Agarwalla ◽  
Yining Lu ◽  
Ryan J. Ouillette ◽  
Brian Forsythe ◽  
...  

2014 ◽  
Vol 24 (7) ◽  
pp. 2156-2166 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael J. Creech ◽  
Marco Yeung ◽  
Matthew Denkers ◽  
Nicole Simunovic ◽  
George S. Athwal ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
Vol 29 (2) ◽  
pp. 230949902110047
Author(s):  
Osman Civan ◽  
Kerem Bilsel ◽  
Mehmet Kapicioglu ◽  
Alpay M Ozenci

Purpose: The ideal treatment algorithm is still controversial for Superior Labral Anterior-Posterior (SLAP) tears. In this systematic review, we aimed to clarify and ascertain which treatment modality is effective and more usable in which conditions. Methods: In this systematic review, we used the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines established for systematic reviews and meta-analysis. “SLAP or Superior Labral Anterior-Posterior” and “biceps tenodesis” search terms were used in The Cochrane Library database and Pubmed from their inception to the 30th of September 2020. A total of 2326 titles were screened and 2069 articles were removed because of their ineligibility. Full texts of 14 studies were screened and finally, six were suitable for the present systematic review. Demographic details and study characteristics, patient satisfaction, functional outcomes, return to preinjury sports level, reoperation, stiffness, sling time and rehabilitation protocols were reviewed and compared between SLAP repair and biceps tenodesis groups. Results: A total of 2326 titles were screened and six studies were detected eligible. Results of 287 patients (SLAP repair: 160, Biceps Tenodesis: 127) were reviewed in included six studies. Biceps tenodesis was showed as more satisfied technique in four of the studies but the statistical comparing results of two groups were not significantly different in each study. Different functional scoring systems used in the studies were not statistically significantly different between the groups. The percentage of return to sport and preinjury level is higher in biceps tenodesis in the five studies. The total reoperation rate for SLAP repair was 19/160 (12%) and biceps tenodesis was 7/127 (6%). Conclusion: The biceps tenodesis has a higher return to preinjury sports level, higher patient satisfaction and lower reoperation rates but functional scores are similar between SLAP repair groups in patients with SLAP tear.


2016 ◽  
Vol 32 (2) ◽  
pp. 365-371 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vineet Thomas Abraham ◽  
Bryan H.M. Tan ◽  
V. Prem Kumar

2019 ◽  
Vol 7 (5) ◽  
pp. 232596711984189 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hussein Abdul-Rassoul ◽  
Matthew Defazio ◽  
Emily J. Curry ◽  
Joseph W. Galvin ◽  
Xinning Li

Background: Controversy exists as to the optimal treatment of superior labrum anterior to posterior (SLAP) tears in athletes. There are no systematic reviews evaluating return-to-sport (RTS) rates after arthroscopic SLAP repair and biceps tenodesis. Purpose: To compare the overall RTS rates in patients with primary type 2 SLAP tears who were managed with arthroscopic SLAP repair versus biceps tenodesis. Study Design: Systematic review; Level of evidence, 4. Methods: A review was performed according to the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines by searching the MEDLINE (PubMed), Embase (Elsevier), and Cochrane Library databases. Inclusion criteria were clinical studies that evaluated RTS rates after arthroscopic SLAP repair, arthroscopic SLAP repair with partial rotator cuff debridement, and biceps tenodesis. The studies were analyzed for quality and inclusion in the final analysis. Data relevant to RTS rates were then extracted and compiled, and outcomes were compared. Results: Of the 337 studies initially identified, 15 (501 patient-athletes) met inclusion criteria. These consisted of 195 patients who underwent isolated arthroscopic SLAP repair (mean age, 31 years; mean follow-up, 3.2 years), 222 patients who underwent arthroscopic SLAP repair with partial rotator cuff debridement (mean age, 22 years; mean follow-up, 5.1 years), and 84 patients who underwent biceps tenodesis (mean age, 42 years; mean follow-up, 3.3 years). The overall RTS rates were high for all 3 procedures (SLAP repair, 79.5%; SLAP repair with rotator cuff debridement, 76.6%; biceps tenodesis, 84.5%), with biceps tenodesis having the highest overall rate. Biceps tenodesis also had the highest RTS rate at the preinjury level (78.6%) compared with SLAP repair (63.6%) and SLAP repair with rotator cuff debridement (66.7%). Conclusion: Primary arthroscopic SLAP repair, arthroscopic SLAP repair with partial rotator cuff debridement, and biceps tenodesis all provide high RTS rates. Biceps tenodesis as an operative treatment of primary SLAP lesions may demonstrate an overall higher RTS rate when compared with traditional SLAP repair in older athletes. More, higher level studies are needed that control for age, level of activity, and type of sport (overhead vs nonoverhead) to determine the efficacy of biceps tenodesis as a primary alternative to arthroscopic SLAP repair in young athletes who present with type 2 SLAP tears.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document