PURPOSE: Various surgical repair techniques for distal biceps tendon ruptures have been reported, however, the optimal technique is unknown. METHODS: Over a 4-year period 19 distal biceps tendon ruptures were repaired: 9 using a single anterior incision and 10 using a modified 2-incision Boyd and Anderson technique. The patients were followed-up prospectively and independently reviewed. RESULTS: Patient-rated elbow evaluation and Short Form-36 (SF-36) scores improved with time independent of surgical technique. At 1 year the 1-incision group regained more flexion (142.8 degrees vs 131.1 degrees ) than the 2-incision group. There was no difference between groups in supination motion, supination strength, or flexion strength, although recovery of flexion strength was initially more rapid for the 2-incision group. Complications were encountered in 44% of cases treated with a 1-incision technique and in 10% of cases treated with the 2-incision technique; however, most of these were minor transient paresthesias. CONCLUSIONS: The differences between the 2 groups were relatively minor with the Morrey 2-incision technique showing a slightly more rapid recovery of flexion strength and fewer complications as compared with the 1-incision technique.
PURPOSE: Various surgical repair techniques for distal biceps tendon ruptures have been reported, however, the optimal technique is unknown. METHODS: Over a 4-year period 19 distal biceps tendon ruptures were repaired: 9 using a single anterior incision and 10 using a modified 2-incision Boyd and Anderson technique. The patients were followed-up prospectively and independently reviewed. RESULTS:Patient-rated elbow evaluation and Short Form-36 (SF-36) scores improved with time independent of surgical technique. At 1 year the 1-incision group regained more flexion (142.8 degrees vs 131.1 degrees ) than the 2-incision group. There was no difference between groups in supination motion, supination strength, or flexion strength, although recovery of flexion strength was initially more rapid for the 2-incision group. Complications were encountered in 44% of cases treated with a 1-incision technique and in 10% of cases treated with the 2-incision technique; however, most of these were minor transient paresthesias. CONCLUSIONS: The differences between the 2 groups were relatively minor with the Morrey 2-incision technique showing a slightly more rapid recovery of flexion strength and fewer complications as compared with the 1-incision technique.
Authors: Monica Kalume Brigido; Michel De Maeseneer; Jon A Jacobson; David A Jamadar; Yoav Morag; Stefaan Marcelis Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2009-02-13 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: A De Carli; E Zanzotto; A P Vadalà; D Luzon; M Di Salvo; A Ferretti Journal: Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc Date: 2009-02-12 Impact factor: 4.342
Authors: Timothy S Johnson; David C Johnson; Michael K Shindle; Answorth A Allen; Andrew J Weiland; John Cavanaugh; Dennis Noonan; Stephen Lyman Journal: HSS J Date: 2008-08-22