Biceps Brachii Alterations Following the Latarjet Procedure: A Prospective Multicenter Study

Purpose: To prospectively investigate the postoperative forearm supination and elbow flexion strength of both upper extremities and popeye deformity in patients who underwent a mini-open Latarjet procedure for anterior shoulder instability. Methods: Patients who underwent a mini-open Latarjet procedure at two specialized shoulder centers were prospectively evaluated preoperatively (T0) and at least 6 months (T1) after surgery. Subjects were tested for elbow flexion and forearm supination strength of both upper extremities using an isometric dynamometer and customized torque dynamometer. Clinical outcome was assessed by the Constant Score (CS), American Shoulder and Elbow Score (ASES) and Simple Shoulder test (SST). Popeye deformity was defined as a distalization of the greatest circumference of the biceps muscle belly towards the lateral epicondyle of the elbow. Results: A total of 20 patients with a mean age of 27 ± 6 years were included in the study. At a mean follow-up of 10 ± 3 months, the elbow flexion strength was restored to the preoperative state (p = 0.240). Forearm supination strength significantly decreased at final follow-up, to 88 % in the surgical arm (p = 0.015) vs. 90 % in the non-surgical arm (p = 0.023). There was no statistical difference when comparing both arms concerning elbow flexion strength (p = 0.510) and forearm supination strength (p = 0.495). No significant popeye deformity was observed in both arms (p = 0.111 vs. p = 0.508). Clinical outcome scores improved significantly from 73 ± 18 to 82 ± 13 (p = 0.014) for CS and 76 ± 22 to 89 ± 12 (p = 0.008) for ASES score preoperatively to final follow-up. No difference in the SST was documented (p = 0.10). Conclusion: The Latarjet procedure showed to preserve elbow flexion strength and provided comparable forearm supination strength compared to the uninjured arm with reliable clinical outcome in this study population. However, a decrease of forearm supination strength in both arms was persistent at a mean of 10 months postoperatively. No popeye deformity was noted in the postoperative examinations. Level of evidence: Case series, Level III.

Operative Versus Nonoperative Management for Distal Biceps Brachii Tendon Lesions: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Background: Both nonoperative and operative treatments have been proposed to manage distal biceps brachii tendon avulsions. However, the advantages and disadvantages of these approaches have not been properly quantified. Purpose: To summarize the current literature on both nonoperative and operative approaches for distal biceps brachii tendon ruptures and to quantify results and limitations. The advantages and disadvantages of the different surgical strategies were investigated as well. Study Design: Systematic review; Level of evidence, 4. Methods: A systematic literature search was performed in March 2020 using PubMed Central, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, Iscrctn.com , clinicaltrials.gov , greylit.org , opengrey.eu , and Scopus literature databases. All human studies evaluating the clinical outcome of nonoperative treatment as well as different surgical techniques were included. The influence of the treatment approach was assessed in terms of the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) score and the Mayo Elbow Performance Index; extension, flexion, supination, and pronation range of motion (ROM); and flexion and supination strength ratio between the injured and uninjured arms. Risk of bias and quality of evidence were assessed using the Cochrane guidelines. Results: Of 1275 studies, 53 studies (N = 1380 patients) matched the inclusion criteria. The results of the meta-analysis comparing operative versus nonoperative approaches for distal biceps tendon avulsion showed significant differences in favor of surgery in terms of DASH score ( P = .02), Mayo Elbow Performance Index ( P < .001), flexion strength (94.7% vs 83.0%, respectively; P < .001), and supination strength (89.2% vs 62.6%, respectively; P < .001). The surgical approach presented 10% heterotopic ossifications, 10% transient sensory nerve injuries, 1.6% transient motor nerve injuries, and a 0.1% rate of persistent motorial disorders. Comparison of the different surgical techniques showed similar results for the fixation methods, whereas the single-incision technique led to a better pronation ROM versus the double-incision approach (81.5° vs 76.1°, respectively; P = .01). Conclusion: The results of this meta-analysis showed the superiority of surgical management over the nonoperative approach for distal biceps tendon detachment, with superior flexion and supination strength and better patient-reported outcomes. The single-incision surgical approach demonstrated a slightly better pronation ROM compared with the double-incision approach, whereas all fixation methods led to similar outcomes.

Restoration of forearm supination by combining pronator teres with allogeneic tendon

Background Many solutions have been proposed in treating of forearm supination. Comparing with other supination function reconstructions, pronator teres rerouting is believed to be less effective due to its insufficient supination strength. The aim of this study is to introduce a modified procedure, and compare its result with two previous approaches. Patients and methods From 2015 to 2020, 11 patients have restored forearm supination by rerouting of the pronator teres weave sutured with allogeneic tendons. The average follow-up period was 17.5 months (12 to 24). The range of active supination at the final follow-up was recorded. Results Almost all patients acquired good supination range. The average active post-operative supination was 72.7° (60° to 80°) at the final follow-up. No complication was observed. All patients retained full range of pronation. Conclusions This study provides a modified supination function reconstruction with simple operating, fine results, low risks, and no affecting of pronation function. The use of allogeneic tendon makes up for the muscles with insufficient length, making it valuable to reconsider those rebuilding operations that were once considered unpromising by many.

Efficacy of management of associated dysfunctions on rotator cuff and long head of the biceps: systematic review

Background The important functional role the rotator cuff (RC) and biceps play in the shoulder, the close anatomical relationship between them and the high incidence of injuries require an appropriate multidisciplinary therapeutic approach after a rigorous assessment. The objective is to identify and analyze surgical interventions, whether or not followed by a postsurgical one, of associated dysfunctions on the RC and long head of the biceps (LHB) and their effectiveness in improving shoulder functionality. Methods A systematic review based on PRISMA protocol was conducted using PubMed, Web of Science, PEDro, Scopus, CINAHL, and Dialnet until 22 April 2021. The main inclusion criteria were as follows: randomized clinical trials including subjects diagnosed with RC and LHB lesions who had surgical and/not post-surgical treatments. The methodological quality of trials was evaluated by the PEDro scale. Data were shown in 3 pre-established tables: (1)sample data, diagnostic methods, dysfunctions and injury frequency, interventions, outcome measures and results; (2)significance and effectiveness of interventions; and (3)comparison of the effectiveness of interventions. Results Eleven studies were selected. The methodological quality of ten of them was assessed as good and one excellent (PEDro scale). All articles had surgical treatments and ten had postoperative management. All trials used arthroscopy and two open surgery too. Single-row, double-row and transosseous repair were used for RC lesions, while SLAP repair, tenotomy, and tenodesis were applied to LHB injuries. Measured parameters were functionality, pain, Popeye’s sign, strength, range of motion, satisfaction degree, biceps cramping, and quality of life. All approaches in general, surgical plus postsurgical, were always effective to the parameters measured in each study. Seven trials compared tenotomy and tenodesis: four of them obtained statistically significant differences in favor of tenodesis in Popeye’s sign, cramping, satisfaction degree, and/or forearm supination strength; and one, in favor of tenotomy in cramping. All studies measured functionality using functional assessment scales. The most widely used was the Constant Score. Conclusions Surgical plus post-surgical interventions in associated dysfunctions on RC and LHB were effective. Tenodesis obtained better results than tenotomy in Popeye’s sign, satisfaction, and forearm supination strength. However, there was no difference regarding biceps cramping.

Clinical Outcomes of Arthroscopic Tenodesis Versus Tenotomy for Long Head of the Biceps Tendon Lesions: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials and Cohort Studies

Background: Controversy exists concerning whether tenotomy or tenodesis is the optimal surgical treatment option for proximal biceps tendon lesions. Purpose: To evaluate the clinical outcomes after arthroscopic tenodesis and tenotomy in the treatment of long head of the biceps tendon (LHBT) lesions. Study Design: Systematic review; Level of evidence, 4. Methods: A systematic review was performed by searching PubMed, the Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and Embase to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and cohort studies that compared the clinical efficacy of tenotomy with that of tenodesis for LHBT lesions. A standardized data extraction form was predesigned to obtain bibliographic information of the study as well as patient, intervention, comparison, and outcome data. A random-effects model was used to pool quantitative data from the primary outcomes. Results: A total of 21 eligible studies were separated into 3 methodological groups: (1) 4 RCTs with level 1 evidence, (2) 3 RCTs and 4 prospective cohort studies with level 2 evidence, and (3) 10 retrospective cohort studies with level 3 to 4 evidence. Analysis of the 3 groups demonstrated a significantly higher risk of the Popeye sign after tenotomy versus tenodesis (group 1: risk ratio [RR], 3.29 [95% CI, 1.92-5.49]; group 2: RR, 2.35 [95% CI, 1.43-3.85]; and group 3: RR, 2.57 [95% CI, 1.33-4.98]). Arm cramping pain remained significantly higher after tenotomy only in the retrospective cohort group (RR, 2.17 [95% CI, 1.20-3.95]). The Constant score for tenotomy was significantly worse than that for tenodesis in the prospective cohort group (standardized mean difference [SMD], –0.47 [95% CI, –0.73 to –0.21]), as were the forearm supination strength index (SMD, –0.75 [95% CI, –1.28 to –0.21]) and the Simple Shoulder Test (SST) score (SMD, –0.60 [95% CI, –0.94 to –0.27]). Conclusion: The results demonstrated that compared with tenodesis, tenotomy had a higher risk of a Popeye deformity in all 3 study groups; worse functional outcomes in terms of the Constant score, forearm supination strength index, and SST score according to prospective cohort studies; and a higher incidence of arm cramping pain according to retrospective cohort studies.

The Loop Tenodesis Procedure—From Biomechanics to First Clinical Results

(1) Introduction: Several surgical therapy options for the treatment of pathologies of the long biceps tendon (LHB) have been established. However, tenotomy, as well as established tenodesis techniques, has disadvantages, such as cosmetic deformities, functional impairments and residual shoulder pain. This study presents the first clinical and structural results of the recently introduced loop tenodesis procedure for the LHB, developed to overcome these issues. (2) Methods: 37 patients (11 women, 26 men, mean age 52 years), who underwent loop tenodesis of the LHB were examined six months after surgery. For the clinical evaluation the Constant score, as well as the LHB score, were used, complemented by elbow flexion and supination strength measurements. The integrity of the tenodesis construct was evaluated indirectly by sonographic detection of the LHB in the bicipital groove. (3) Results: Both, the overall Constant score as well as the LHB score showed significant improvements six months postoperatively, as compared to the preoperative value. Fourteen patients (38%) presented an examiner-dependent upper arm deformity, although only five patients (13%) reported subjective cosmetic deformities. Both, flexion and supination strength were preserved compared to the preoperative level. In 35 patients (95%), the tenodesis in the bicipital groove was proofed sonographically. (4) Conclusion: The loop tenodesis of the LHB provides good-to-excellent overall clinical results after a short-term follow-up of six month. The incidence of cosmetic deformities was inferior compared to conventional therapy options (tenotomy and anchor tenodesis).

Acute distal biceps tendon ruptures: anatomy, pathology and management - state of the art

All patients with acute complete distal biceps tendon ruptures who are not low demand or medically unfit to proceed with surgery are offered operative repair. This restores arm shape, supination strength and function, and decreases their cramping symptoms. Surgical repair technique varies significantly depending on location and training centre. Nuances in technique and appropriate implant selection need to be noted in order to achieve a strong repair allowing early active range of motion. Intimate knowledge of distal biceps tendon anatomy is key to avoid complications associated with the different approaches. The cumulative body of evidence on complications, coupled with knowledge of the different biomechanical construct strengths of the alternative methods of fixation, points to the use of the cortical button technique without the addition of an interference screw. Subtle variations in drill hole positioning on the bicipital tuberosity secures either an anatomic or non-anatomic repair. Anatomic repair results in greater supination peak torque and fatigue strength, and in greater flexion fatigue strength. It is advisable to perform an anatomic repair in elite athletes or those patients who significantly rely on supination strength and endurance for their livelihood. A universal postoperative protocol is suggested for all repairs.