Advertisement

All-Arthroscopic Suprapectoral Versus Open Subpectoral Tenodesis of the Long Head of the Biceps Brachii Without the Use of Interference Screws

Published:September 19, 2016DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arthro.2016.07.007

      Purpose

      To compare patient-reported outcomes and healing rates after open subpectoral and all-arthroscopic suprapectoral biceps tenodesis without the use of interference screws in patients with more than 2 years of follow-up.

      Methods

      Patients with at least 2 years of follow-up who underwent open subpectoral biceps tenodesis or all-arthroscopic suprapectoral biceps tenodesis without concomitant rotator cuff repair, labral repair, or Mumford procedure were considered for enrollment in the study. They were evaluated for visual analog scale (VAS), American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) score, and satisfaction with function and biceps contour. Ultrasonography was performed to evaluate the integrity of the tenodesis site and measure biceps muscle diameters on each arm.

      Results

      Forty-nine patients were eligible for our study and of these, 38 were able to participate. Twenty-three patients had open subpectoral biceps tenodesis and 15 received all-arthroscopic suprapectoral biceps tenodesis. The average follow-up time was 4.5 years (range 2-9.1 years). There were no significant differences in anterior shoulder pain VAS, ASES scores, or satisfaction rates. The average anterior shoulder VAS was 0.7 ± 1.1 for the open group and 0.9 ± 1.8 for the arthroscopic group (P = .74). The mean ASES score for the open group was 90.6 ± 11.4 and 91.4 ± 13.9 for the arthroscopic group (P = .69). All patients had an intact tenodesis site on ultrasonography and the ratio of operative to nonoperative biceps diameters was 100.2% ± 12.8% for the open group and 99.1% ± 10.8% for the arthroscopic group (P = .66). There were no infections and no brachial plexus injuries in either group.

      Conclusions

      Open subpectoral biceps tenodesis and all-arthroscopic suprapectoral biceps tenodesis are both successful surgeries with consistently positive outcomes. Tenodesis can be performed in either location without interference screw fixation with durable, reliable results.

      Level of Evidence

      Level III, retrospective comparative trial.
      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'

      Subscribe:

      Subscribe to Arthroscopy
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect

      References

        • Barber A.
        • Field L.D.
        • Ryu R.
        Biceps tendon and superior labrum injuries: Decision-making.
        J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2007; 89: 1844-1855
        • Nho S.J.
        • Strauss E.J.
        • Lenart B.A.
        • et al.
        Long head of the biceps tendinopathy: Diagnosis and management.
        J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2010; 18: 645-656
        • Frost A.
        • Zafar M.S.
        • Maffulli N.
        Tenotomy versus tenodesis in the management of pathologic lesions of the tendon of the long head of the biceps brachii.
        Am J Sports Med. 2009; 37: 828-833
        • Hsu A.R.
        • Ghodadra N.S.
        • Provencher M.T.
        • et al.
        Biceps tenotomy versus tenodesis: A review of clinical outcomes and biomechanical results.
        J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2011; 20: 326-332
        • Elser F.
        • Braun S.
        • Dewing C.B.
        • Giphart J.E.
        • Millett P.J.
        Anatomy, function, injuries, and treatment of the long head of the biceps brachii tendon.
        Arthroscopy. 2011; 27: 581-592
        • Virk M.S.
        • Nicholson G.P.
        Complications of proximal biceps tenotomy and tenodesis.
        Clin Sports Med. 2016; 35: 181-188
        • Ahrens P.M.
        • Boileau P.
        The long head of biceps and associated tendinopathy.
        J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2007; 89: 1001-1009
        • Werner B.C.
        • Brockmeier S.F.
        • Gwathmey F.W.
        Trends in long head biceps tenodesis.
        Am J Sports Med. 2015; 43: 570-578
        • Froimson A.I.
        • Oh I.
        Keyhole tenodesis of biceps origin at the shoulder.
        Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1975; 112: 245-249
        • Mazzocca A.D.
        • Rios C.G.
        • Romeo A.A.
        • Arciero R.A.
        Subpectoral biceps tenodesis with interference screw fixation.
        Arthroscopy. 2005; 21: 896.e1-896.e7
        • Papp D.F.
        • Skelley N.W.
        • Sutter E.G.
        • et al.
        Biomechanical evaluation of open suture anchor fixation versus interference screw for biceps tenodesis.
        Orthopedics. 2011; 34: e275-e278
        • Amaravathi R.S.
        • Pankappilly B.
        • Kany J.
        Arthroscopic keyhole proximal biceps tenodesis: A technical note.
        J Orthop Surg (Hong Kong). 2011; 19: 379-383
        • Boileau P.
        • Krishnan S.G.
        • Coste J.S.
        • Walch G.
        Arthroscopic biceps tenodesis: A new technique using bioabsorbable interference screw fixation.
        Arthroscopy. 2002; 18: 1002-1012
        • Ozalay M.
        • Akpinar S.
        • Karaeminogullari O.
        • et al.
        Mechanical strength of four different biceps tenodesis techniques.
        Arthroscopy. 2005; 21: 992-998
        • Sampatacos N.
        • Getelman M.H.
        • Henninger H.B.
        Biomechanical comparison of two techniques for arthroscopic suprapectoral biceps tenodesis: Interference screw versus implant-free intraosseous tendon fixation.
        J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2014; 23: 1731-1739
        • Snyder S.J.
        • Fasulo G.J.
        Shoulder arthroscopy: Surgical technique.
        Surg Technol Int. 1993; 2: 447-453
        • Snyder S.J.
        • Karzel R.P.
        • Getelman M.H.
        • Burns J.P.
        • Bahk M.S.
        • Auerbach D.M.
        Biceps tendon.
        in: Shoulder Arthroscopy. 3rd ed. Wolters Kluwer Health, Philadelphia, PA2015: 91-95
        • Werner B.C.
        • Evans C.L.
        • Holzgrefe R.E.
        • et al.
        Arthroscopic suprapectoral and open subpectoral biceps tenodesis: A comparison of minimum 2-year clinical outcomes.
        Am J Sports Med. 2014; 42: 2583-2590
        • Katthagen J.C.
        • Grimmas P.
        • Jensen G.
        • Voigt C.
        • Lill H.
        Suprapectoral mini-open biceps tenodesis—functional and sonographic results.
        Z Orthop Unfall. 2015; 153: 153-159
        • Gombera M.M.
        • Kahlenberg C.A.
        • Nair R.
        • Saltzman M.D.
        • Terry M.A.
        All-arthroscopic suprapectoral versus open subpectoral tenodesis of the long head of the biceps brachii.
        Am J Sports Med. 2015; 43: 1077-1083
        • Zhang Q.
        • Zhou J.
        • Ge H.
        • Cheng B.
        Tenotomy or tenodesis for long head biceps lesions in shoulders with reparable rotator cuff tears: a prospective randomised trial.
        Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2015; 23: 464-469
        • Sanders B.
        • Lavery K.P.
        • Pennington S.
        • Warner J.J.
        Clinical success of biceps tenodesis with and without release of the transverse humeral ligament.
        J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2012; 21: 66-71
        • Moon S.C.
        • Cho N.S.
        • Rhee Y.G.
        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. 2015; 43: 63-68