Literature DB >> 30069786

Functional outcome in patients who underwent distal biceps tendon repair.

Jacqueline van der Vis1, Stein J Janssen2, Robert Haverlag1, Michel P J van den Bekerom3.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: To asses physical function and quality of life after distal biceps tendon repair and compare suture anchor and cortical button fixation. Secondarily, we assessed the impact of other factors: acute repair, graft use, concomitant arm conditions, contralateral rupture, and complications.
METHODS: We approached all 50 patients that underwent distal biceps tendon rupture repair (2009-2016) to participate in our study and complete a questionnaire including: patient demographics, QuickDASH, Quality of life EQ-5D-5L, pain score, and Mayo Elbow Performance score (MEPS).
RESULTS: In total, 37 (76%) of 49 alive patients participated in our study. All were men, with a median age of 47 years. Median follow-up was 34 months (range 8-100 months). On average, we found perfect upper extremity (QuickDASH, median: 0, IQR 0-7.9; 53% had no [QuickDASH = 0] upper extremity disability) and elbow function (MEPS, median: 100, IQR 100-100; 83% had perfect [MEPS > 90] clinical elbow function), perfect quality of life (EQ-5D-5L, median: 1, IQR 0.85-1; 59% had perfect [EQ-5D-5L = 1] quality of life), and no pain (median 0, IQR 0-0; 68% had no pain). We found no difference in upper extremity (QuickDASH: anchor, median 1.1, IQR 0-6.8; endobutton, median 0, IQR 0-9.1, p = 0.972) and elbow (MEPS: anchor, median 100, IQR 100-100; endobutton, median 100, IQR 100-100, p = 0.895) function, quality of life (EQ-5D-5L: anchor, median 1, IQR 0.85-1; endobutton, median 1, IQR 0.84-1, p = 0.507), and pain score (anchor, median 0, IQR 0-0.5; endobutton, median 0, IQR 0-0, p = 0.742) when comparing the anchor to endobutton fixation technique.
CONCLUSIONS: Overall, patients have excellent outcome after distal biceps tendon rupture repair. There was no difference in patient-reported outcome measures between suture anchor and endobutton fixation. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, retrospective comparative study.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Biceps; Elbow; Patient-reported outcome; Quality of life; Repair; Rupture

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 30069786     DOI: 10.1007/s00402-018-3018-6

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Arch Orthop Trauma Surg        ISSN: 0936-8051            Impact factor:   3.067


  4 in total

1.  Reliability, validity and critical appraisal of the cross-cultural adapted German version of the Mayo Elbow Performance Score (MEPS-G).

Authors:  A Papen; T Schöttker-Königer; A Schäfer; F Morrison; B Hollinger; K J Burkhart; R Nietschke; A Zimmerer; N Maffulli; F Migliorini; Marco M Schneider
Journal:  J Orthop Surg Res       Date:  2022-06-25       Impact factor: 2.677

2.  Primary repair of severely retracted nonchronic distal biceps tendon rupture using 2-incision anterior-approach repair.

Authors:  Noah DeAngelo; Rachel A Thomas; H Mike Kim
Journal:  JSES Int       Date:  2020-03-03

3.  No functional differences in anatomic reconstruction with one vs. two suture anchors after non-simultaneous bilateral distal biceps brachii tendon rupture: a case report and review of the literature.

Authors:  Manuel Weißenberger; Tizian Heinz; Kilian Rueckl; Maximilian Rudert; Alexander Klug; Reinhard Hoffmann; Kay Schmidt-Horlohé
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2020-04-27       Impact factor: 2.362

4.  Outcomes of distal biceps tendon repair using a dual incision, cortical button technique: a single surgeon study.

Authors:  Murtaza K Khwaja; Emile Oliver; Holly Wilson; Kawaljit Dhaliwal; Baseem Choudhry; Daniel Neen
Journal:  JSES Int       Date:  2021-04-20
  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.