BACKGROUND: Distal biceps brachii tendon repairs performed with a tension slide technique using a cortical button (CB) and interference screw are stronger than those based on suture fixation through bone tunnels (BTs) in biomechanical studies. However, clinical comparison of these 2 techniques is lacking in the literature. PURPOSE: To perform a clinical comparison of the single-incision CB and double-incision BT techniques. STUDY DESIGN: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. METHODS: Distal biceps tendon ruptures repaired through either the single-incision CB or double-incision BT technique were retrospectively identified at a single institution. Patients>1 year out from surgery were assessed for range of motion, strength, and complications, and they completed a DASH questionnaire (Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand). RESULTS: Patients in the CB group (n=20) were older (52±9.5 vs 43.7±8.7 years; P=.008), had a shorter interval from surgery to evaluation (17.7±5 vs 30.8±16.5 months; P=.001), and were less likely to smoke (0% vs 28.5%; P=.02) compared with the BT patients (n=21). DASH scores were similar between groups (4.46±4.4 [CB] vs 5.7±7.5 [BT]; P=.65). Multivariate analysis revealed no differences in range of motion or strength between groups. More CB patients (30%; n=6) experienced a complication compared with those in the BT group (4.8%; n=1) (P=.04), and these complications were predominantly paresthesias of the superficial radial nerve that did not resolve. There were no reoperations or repair failures in either group. CONCLUSION: Both the single-incision CB and double-incision BT techniques provided excellent clinical results. Complications were more common in the single-incision CB group and most commonly involved paresthesias of the superficial radial nerve.
BACKGROUND: Distal biceps brachii tendon repairs performed with a tension slide technique using a cortical button (CB) and interference screw are stronger than those based on suture fixation through bone tunnels (BTs) in biomechanical studies. However, clinical comparison of these 2 techniques is lacking in the literature. PURPOSE: To perform a clinical comparison of the single-incision CB and double-incision BT techniques. STUDY DESIGN: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. METHODS: Distal biceps tendon ruptures repaired through either the single-incision CB or double-incision BT technique were retrospectively identified at a single institution. Patients>1 year out from surgery were assessed for range of motion, strength, and complications, and they completed a DASH questionnaire (Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand). RESULTS:Patients in the CB group (n=20) were older (52±9.5 vs 43.7±8.7 years; P=.008), had a shorter interval from surgery to evaluation (17.7±5 vs 30.8±16.5 months; P=.001), and were less likely to smoke (0% vs 28.5%; P=.02) compared with the BTpatients (n=21). DASH scores were similar between groups (4.46±4.4 [CB] vs 5.7±7.5 [BT]; P=.65). Multivariate analysis revealed no differences in range of motion or strength between groups. More CB patients (30%; n=6) experienced a complication compared with those in the BT group (4.8%; n=1) (P=.04), and these complications were predominantly paresthesias of the superficial radial nerve that did not resolve. There were no reoperations or repair failures in either group. CONCLUSION: Both the single-incision CB and double-incision BT techniques provided excellent clinical results. Complications were more common in the single-incision CB group and most commonly involved paresthesias of the superficial radial nerve.
Authors: Allison J Rao; Gregory T Scarola; Taylor M Rowe; Nicholas C Yeatts; David M Macknet; Samuel E Ford; Ian S Hong; R Glenn Gaston; Bryan M Saltzman; Nady Hamid; Patrick M Connor Journal: HSS J Date: 2021-04-27
Authors: Marco Di Stefano; Lorenzo Sensi; Leonardo di Bella; Raffaele Tucci; Efisio Bazzucchi; Luigi Zanna Journal: Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol Date: 2021-10-01
Authors: Aditi Majumdar; Christina Salas; William Chavez; Christopher Bankhead; Tony J Sapradit; Deana Mercer; Daniel C Wascher; Dustin L Richter Journal: Arthrosc Sports Med Rehabil Date: 2021-04-16
Authors: Kyle R Sochacki; Zachary T Lawson; Robert A Jack; David Dong; Andrew B Robbins; Michael R Moreno; Patrick C McCulloch Journal: Arthrosc Tech Date: 2020-04-25
Authors: Cody Goedderz; Mark A Plantz; Erik B Gerlach; Nicholas C Arpey; Peter R Swiatek; Colin K Cantrell; Michael A Terry; Vehniah K Tjong Journal: Clin Shoulder Elb Date: 2022-01-11