Literature DB >> 26493837

Biceps tenodesis (long head): arthroscopic keyhole technique versus arthroscopic interference screw: a prospective comparative clinical and radiographic marker study.

Jean Kany, Régis Guinand, Pierre Croutzet, Rajkumar Amaravathi, Padmanaban Sekaran.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: The long head biceps tenodesis (LHBT) is an alternative to tenotomy in order to prevent Popeye sign.Biomechanical studies showed that interference screw(IFS) was the strongest fixation but there might be complications and cost. What's more, the analyses of tenodesis failures are undervalued because they only take visible deformations of the arm into account. The purpose of this study was to compare a modified arthroscopic "keyhole" LHBT (modified @KH) with an arthroscopic IFS LHBT(@IFS) using an objective method. We hypothesized that modified @KH gave similar clinical outcomes as @IFS without its hassles or drawbacks.
METHODS: We present a 12-month prospective comparative study (modified @KH versus @IFS) performed by two experienced orthopedic surgeons. Modified @KH was performed on one hundred and nine patients versus @IFS that was performed on one hundred and two. A radiopaque marker was placed into the tendon. The review was conducted in the sixth month with clinical examination and plain standard X-ray to objectify the potential migration of the marker.
RESULTS: Modified @KH showed 2.4 % visible deformity without any Popeye sign but 3.4 % radiographic metallic marker migrations. No complications were noted. @IFS showed 5.8 % visible deformity with 2.9 % Popeye sign and with 10.3 % radiographic metallic marker migrations;pain at tenodesis location was noted in 2 %. P value (0.13) indicates that there were no statistically significant differences.
CONCLUSION: We confirm the hypothesis that the modified@KH gives clinical and radiographic outcomes at least similar to @IFS without any complications and cost. The establishment of the radiopaque marker allows us to know the exact number of failures.Level of evidence Consecutive prospective comparative clinical, Level II-1 studies.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 26493837     DOI: 10.1007/s00590-015-1714-2

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol        ISSN: 1633-8065


  25 in total

1.  Arthroscopic keyhole proximal biceps tenodesis: a technical note.

Authors:  Rajkumar S Amaravathi; Biju Pankappilly; Jean Kany
Journal:  J Orthop Surg (Hong Kong)       Date:  2011-12       Impact factor: 1.118

2.  Clinical and radiologic results of arthroscopic biceps tenodesis with suture anchor in the setting of rotator cuff tear.

Authors:  Hyun Il Lee; Min Soo Shon; Kyoung Hwan Koh; Tae Kang Lim; Jaewon Heo; Jae Chul Yoo
Journal:  J Shoulder Elbow Surg       Date:  2013-09-08       Impact factor: 3.019

3.  The biomechanical evaluation of four fixation techniques for proximal biceps tenodesis.

Authors:  Augustus D Mazzocca; James Bicos; Stephen Santangelo; Anthony A Romeo; Robert A Arciero
Journal:  Arthroscopy       Date:  2005-11       Impact factor: 4.772

4.  All-arthroscopic suprapectoral versus open subpectoral tenodesis of the long head of the biceps brachii.

Authors:  Mufaddal Mustafa Gombera; Cynthia A Kahlenberg; Rueben Nair; Matthew D Saltzman; Michael A Terry
Journal:  Am J Sports Med       Date:  2015-03-29       Impact factor: 6.202

5.  Time-dependent changes in failure loads of 3 biceps tenodesis techniques: in vivo study in a sheep model.

Authors:  Onder Kilicoglu; Ozgur Koyuncu; Mehmet Demirhan; Cem Zeki Esenyel; Ata Can Atalar; Serhat Ozsoy; Ergun Bozdag; Emin Sunbuloglu; Bilge Bilgic
Journal:  Am J Sports Med       Date:  2005-07-11       Impact factor: 6.202

6.  Isolated arthroscopic biceps tenotomy or tenodesis improves symptoms in patients with massive irreparable rotator cuff tears.

Authors:  Pascal Boileau; François Baqué; Laure Valerio; Philip Ahrens; Christopher Chuinard; Christophe Trojani
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  2007-04       Impact factor: 5.284

7.  Arthroscopic biceps tenodesis: a new technique using bioabsorbable interference screw fixation.

Authors:  Pascal Boileau; Sumant G Krishnan; Jean-Sebastien Coste; Gilles Walch
Journal:  Arthroscopy       Date:  2002 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 4.772

8.  The keyhole technique for arthroscopic tenodesis of the long head of the biceps tendon. In vivo prospective study with a radio-opaque marker.

Authors:  J Kany; R Guinand; R S Amaravathi; I Alassaf
Journal:  Orthop Traumatol Surg Res       Date:  2015-01-08       Impact factor: 2.256

9.  Arthroscopic biceps tenodesis using the percutaneous intra-articular transtendon technique.

Authors:  Jon K Sekiya; Hussein A Elkousy; Mark W Rodosky
Journal:  Arthroscopy       Date:  2003-12       Impact factor: 4.772

10.  Clinical outcomes of revision biceps tenodesis.

Authors:  J M Gregory; D P Harwood; E Gochanour; S L Sherman; A A Romeo
Journal:  Int J Shoulder Surg       Date:  2012-04
View more
  2 in total

Review 1.  The rate and reporting of fracture after biceps tenodesis: A systematic review.

Authors:  Hailey P Huddleston; Joey S Kurtzman; Samuel Gedailovich; Steven M Koehler; William R Aibinder
Journal:  J Orthop       Date:  2021-11-24

2.  Short-Term Clinical and Return-to-Work Outcomes After Arthroscopic Suprapectoral Onlay Biceps Tenodesis With a Single Suture Anchor.

Authors:  Brandon C Cabarcas; Alexander Beletsky; Joseph Liu; Anirudh K Gowd; Brandon J Manderle; Matthew Cohn; Nikhil N Verma
Journal:  Arthrosc Sports Med Rehabil       Date:  2021-05-29
  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.