Single-Incision Distal Biceps Tendon Repair

2009 ◽  
Vol 19 (4) ◽  
pp. 258-263 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lindley B. Wall ◽  
Leesa M. Galatz
2019 ◽  
Vol 7 (7_suppl5) ◽  
pp. 2325967119S0036
Author(s):  
Kenneth M. Lin ◽  
Justin Chan ◽  
Brian J. Lin ◽  
Christopher L. Camp ◽  
Grant Hoerig Garcia ◽  
...  

Objectives: While various techniques for distal biceps repair have been described, biomechanical studies have shown cortical button fixation to outperform bone tunnels, intraosseous screws, and suture anchors. Furthermore, numerous studies have shown no difference in complication rate between single- and dual-incision approaches. Thus, it follows that a single-incision approach with cortical button fixation may provide superior clinical outcomes with minimal complications. The purpose of this study is first to investigate intra-operative and short-term complications of distal biceps tendon repair through a single-incision approach using unicortical button fixation, and secondly to assess clinical outcomes. Methods: 52 patients who underwent distal biceps repair with unicortical button fixation (Figure 1) at a single institution from 2014 to 2017 were identified. Exclusion criteria included age less than 18 or greater than 75 years, prior ipsilateral biceps repair, concomitant ipsilateral surgical procedure, and most recent follow-up less than 2 months. Postoperative nerve deficits, flexion and supination strength by manual testing, range of motion, Mayo Elbow Performance Score (MEPS) and radiographs for identification of heterotopic ossification (HO) were obtained and analyzed retrospectively. Results: Fifty-two patients with 53 distal biceps ruptures were included, with mean age 48 years (range 25-71 years). Median time from injury to surgery was 2 weeks (range 1 day to 16 weeks), with 15 patients being treated at greater than 3 weeks from injury. Forty-four patients (83%) had complete tears. Following surgery, average time to final follow-up was 22.8 weeks (range 8-65 weeks). Postoperatively, 49 patients (92.5%) had full range of motion, 48 patients (90.6%) had return of full supination and flexion strength by manual muscle testing (the remaining patients had strength graded as 5-/5). There was no difference in outcomes between those patients treated < 3 weeks from injury compared to those treated > 3 weeks from injury. Two patients (3.8%) initially reported sensory deficit in the lateral antebrachial cutaneous nerve distribution, both cases of which fully resolved by 7 and 11 weeks postoperative. Two patients (3.8%) displayed radiographic evidence of heterotopic ossification, Hastings and Graham class I (Figure 2). One of these was an incidental finding without any clinical symptoms, the other had mild pain but normal strength and neurovascular function. Mean postoperative MEPS was 93.9 (range 60-100), corresponding to “excellent” function (MEPS>90). Conclusion: Distal biceps repair using single incision, unicortical button fixation yields a low rate of complications with good clinical results compared to other techniques reported in the literature. The single incision approach in patients treated between 3 and 16 weeks from injury is safe and resulted in outcomes no different than in those patients treated <3 weeks from injury. Further investigation is warranted in the form of larger, comparative studies with more robust outcome measures and longer term follow up. [Figure: see text][Figure: see text]


Hand Surgery ◽  
2012 ◽  
Vol 17 (03) ◽  
pp. 409-412 ◽  
Author(s):  
Du Hyun Ro ◽  
Goo Hyun Baek ◽  
Hyun Sik Gong

Complete distal biceps tendon rupture causes a considerable loss of supination and flexion strength, and thus, surgical repair is indicated in active individuals. To reduce the risk of injury to the radial nerve in the confined space where the distal biceps inserts into the radius, several surgical methods have been reported, such as, pull out sutures, two-incision techniques, and the use of suture anchors. Here, we describe our modified single-incision distal biceps tendon repair technique using three suture anchors, which widens the bone-tendon contact surface and simplifies tensioning of the tendon attachment.


2015 ◽  
Vol 44 (1) ◽  
pp. 59-62 ◽  
Author(s):  
Steven B. Cohen ◽  
Patrick S. Buckley ◽  
Brian Neuman ◽  
J. Martin Leland ◽  
Michael G. Ciccotti ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 232596712098175
Author(s):  
Gagan Grewal ◽  
Eamon D. Bernardoni ◽  
Mark S. Cohen ◽  
John J. Fernandez ◽  
Nikhil N. Verma ◽  
...  

Background: Little is known about the clinical indications of performing a revision distal biceps tendon repair/reconstruction, and there is even less data available on the clinical outcomes of patients after revision surgery. Purpose: To determine the clinical outcomes of patients undergoing revision distal biceps tendon repair/reconstruction and evaluate the causes of primary repair failure. Study Design: Case series; Level of evidence, 4. Methods: We performed a retrospective review of patients undergoing ipsilateral primary and revision distal biceps tendon repair/reconstruction at a single institution. Between 2011 and 2016, a total of 277 patients underwent distal biceps tendon repair, with 8 patients requiring revision surgery. Patient characteristics, surgical technique, and patient-reported outcome scores (shortened version of Disabilities of Arm, Shoulder and Hand [QuickDASH], 12-Item Short Form Health Survey [SF-12], visual analog scale [VAS] for pain, and Mayo Elbow Performance Score [MEPS]), were assessed. Complications as well as indications for reoperation after primary and revision surgery were examined. Results: The overall revision rate was 2.9%. The number of single- and double-incision techniques utilized were similar among the primary repairs (50% single-incision, 50% double-incision) and revision repairs/reconstructions (62.5% single-incision, 37.5% double-incision). Reasons for reoperation included continued pain and weakness (n = 7), limited range of motion (n = 2), and acute traumatic re-rupture (n = 1). The median duration between primary and revision surgery was 9.5 months (interquartile range [IQR], 5.8-12.8 months). Intraoperatively, the most common finding during revision was a partially ruptured, fibrotic distal tendon with extensive adhesions. At a median of 33.7 months after revision surgery (IQR, 21.7-40.7 months), the median QuickDASH was 12.5 (IQR, 1.7-23.3), MEPS was 92.5 (IQR, 80.0-100), SF-12 mental component measure was 53.4 (IQR, 47.6-58.2), SF-12 physical component measure was 52.1 (IQR, 36.9-55.4), and VAS for elbow pain was 1.0 (IQR, 0-2.0). Revision surgery had a complication rate of 37.5% (3 of 8 patients), consisting of persistent pain and weakness (2 patients; 25%) and numbness over the dorsal radial sensory nerve (1 patient; 12.5%). Two patients required reoperation (25% reoperation rate). Conclusion: The overall revision distal biceps repair/reconstruction rate was approximately 3%. While patients undergoing revision distal biceps repair demonstrated improved outcomes after revision surgery, these outcomes remained inferior to previously reported outcomes of patients undergoing only primary distal biceps repair.


2013 ◽  
Vol 38 (4) ◽  
pp. 791-795 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael B. Cross ◽  
Claus C. Egidy ◽  
Ray H. Wu ◽  
Daryl C. Osbahr ◽  
Denis Nam ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document