PURPOSE: To determine if reoperation rates are higher for patients who underwent isolated rotator cuff repair (RCR) than those who underwent RCR with concomitant biceps tenodesis using a large private-payer database. METHODS: A national insurance database was queried for patients who underwent arthroscopic RCR between the years 2007 and 2014 (PearlDiver, Warsaw, IN). The Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) 29,827 (arthroscopy, shoulder, surgical; with RCR) identified RCR patients who were subdivided into 3 groups-group 1: RCR without biceps tenodesis; group 2: RCR with concomitant arthroscopic biceps tenodesis (CPT 29827 and 29,828); group 3: RCR with concomitant open biceps tenodesis (CPT 29827 and 23,430). Reoperation rates (revision RCR, subsequent biceps surgeries) and complications at 30 days, 90 days, 6 months, and 1 year were analyzed. Multivariate logistic regression was used to compare reoperations and complications between groups. Rotator cuff tear size, whether the biceps was ruptured and whether a biceps tenotomy was performed, was not available. RESULTS: Group 1: 27,178 patients. Group 2: 4,810 patients. Group 3: 1,493 patients. More patients underwent concomitant arthroscopic than concomitant open tenodesis (P < .001). A total of 2,509 patients underwent a reoperation for RCR or biceps tenodesis within 1 year after RCR. When adjusted for age, sex, and comorbidities, no significant differences in reoperation rates at 30 days or 90 days among the 3 groups, but significantly more patients who had a tenodesis, required a reoperation compared with those who did not have a tenodesis at 6 months and 1 year (both P < .001). Urinary tract infections were more common in patients who did not have a tenodesis, whereas dislocation, nerve injury, and surgical site infection were more common in tenodesis patients. CONCLUSIONS: Higher reoperation rates at 1 year were seen in patients who had concomitant biceps tenodesis. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, case-control database review study.
PURPOSE: To determine if reoperation rates are higher for patients who underwent isolated rotator cuff repair (RCR) than those who underwent RCR with concomitant biceps tenodesis using a large private-payer database. METHODS: A national insurance database was queried for patients who underwent arthroscopic RCR between the years 2007 and 2014 (PearlDiver, Warsaw, IN). The Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) 29,827 (arthroscopy, shoulder, surgical; with RCR) identified RCR patients who were subdivided into 3 groups-group 1: RCR without biceps tenodesis; group 2: RCR with concomitant arthroscopic biceps tenodesis (CPT 29827 and 29,828); group 3: RCR with concomitant open biceps tenodesis (CPT 29827 and 23,430). Reoperation rates (revision RCR, subsequent biceps surgeries) and complications at 30 days, 90 days, 6 months, and 1 year were analyzed. Multivariate logistic regression was used to compare reoperations and complications between groups. Rotator cuff tear size, whether the biceps was ruptured and whether a biceps tenotomy was performed, was not available. RESULTS: Group 1: 27,178 patients. Group 2: 4,810 patients. Group 3: 1,493 patients. More patients underwent concomitant arthroscopic than concomitant open tenodesis (P < .001). A total of 2,509 patients underwent a reoperation for RCR or biceps tenodesis within 1 year after RCR. When adjusted for age, sex, and comorbidities, no significant differences in reoperation rates at 30 days or 90 days among the 3 groups, but significantly more patients who had a tenodesis, required a reoperation compared with those who did not have a tenodesis at 6 months and 1 year (both P < .001). Urinary tract infections were more common in patients who did not have a tenodesis, whereas dislocation, nerve injury, and surgical site infection were more common in tenodesis patients. CONCLUSIONS: Higher reoperation rates at 1 year were seen in patients who had concomitant biceps tenodesis. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, case-control database review study.
Authors: Thomas L Sanders; Ayoosh Pareek; Vishal S Desai; Timothy E Hewett; Bruce A Levy; Michael J Stuart; Diane L Dahm; Aaron J Krych Journal: Am J Sports Med Date: 2018-08-20 Impact factor: 6.202
Authors: Avinesh Agarwalla; Gregory L Cvetanovich; Anirudh K Gowd; Anthony A Romeo; Brian J Cole; Nikhil N Verma; Brian Forsythe Journal: Orthop J Sports Med Date: 2019-05-28
Authors: Brandon J Erickson; Peter N Chalmers; John D'Angelo; Kevin Ma; Dana Rowe; Michael G Ciccotti; Anthony A Romeo Journal: Orthop J Sports Med Date: 2022-02-10
Authors: Bryan M Saltzman; Timothy S Leroux; Eric J Cotter; Bryce Basques; Justin Griffin; Rachel M Frank; Anthony A Romeo; Nikhil N Verma Journal: HSS J Date: 2019-01-03