Literature DB >> 31410527

Double on-lay fixation using all suture-type anchor for subpectoral biceps tenodesis has favorable functional outcomes and leads to less cosmetic deformities than single on-lay fixation.

Sung-Min Rhee1, Ho Yeon Jeong2, Kyunghan Ro1, Samyak Pancholi1, Yong Girl Rhee3.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: This study aimed to compare the clinical outcomes between single on-lay and double on-lay subpectoral biceps tenodesis (SPBT) using all-suture type anchor in patients with concomitant long head of the biceps tendon (LHBT) lesions and rotator cuff tears.
METHODS: The study included 130 patients who underwent SPBT using all-suture type anchor and arthroscopic rotator cuff repair. Single and double anchor on-lay fixations were performed in 69 patients (group A) and 61 patients (group B), respectively. In 16 patients of group A and 36 patients of group B, a metallic wire was embedded at tenodesis site and difference of wire location pre-and postoperatively was measured using simple radiography.
RESULTS: In both groups, the mean visual analogue scale (VAS) score during motion, the mean UCLA and constant scores significantly improved at the last follow-up (all p < 0.001). These scores were not significantly different between two groups. However, postoperatively, a significant difference was observed in the incidence of cosmetic deformity between two groups (p = 0.019). The cosmetic deformity was noted in 9 (13.0%) patients (Popeye deformity 7.2% and biceps softening 5.8%) in group A and 1 (1.6%) patient (Popeye deformity) in group B. In the subgroup analysis on biceps migration after the surgery, the mean migration distance of metal wire was 2.5 ± 3.0 mm in group A and 1.9 ± 2.6 mm in group B (n.s.). No patient had migration of > 10 mm.
CONCLUSIONS: SPBT using all-suture type anchor was a favorable treatment option for lesions of the LHBT with rotator cuff tear. The clinical relevance of this study is the finding that double on-lay fixation with all-suture type anchor would result less cosmetic deformity than the single on-lay fixation for those who need subpectoral biceps tenodesis. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.

Entities:  

Keywords:  All-suture anchor; Biceps tendon; Double on-lay; Shoulder; Subpectoral tenodesis; Tenodesis

Mesh:

Year:  2019        PMID: 31410527     DOI: 10.1007/s00167-019-05663-4

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc        ISSN: 0942-2056            Impact factor:   4.342


  34 in total

1.  Failure of biceps tenodesis with interference screw fixation.

Authors:  Benjamin Shay Koch; Robert T Burks
Journal:  Arthroscopy       Date:  2012-05       Impact factor: 4.772

2.  Failure mode of suture anchors as a function of insertion depth.

Authors:  C Kelly Bynum; Steven Lee; Andrew Mahar; James Tasto; Robert Pedowitz
Journal:  Am J Sports Med       Date:  2005-05-11       Impact factor: 6.202

3.  Maximum load to failure and tensile displacement of an all-suture glenoid anchor compared with a screw-in glenoid anchor.

Authors:  Tim Dwyer; Thomas L Willett; Andrew P Dold; Massimo Petrera; David Wasserstein; Danny B Whelan; John S Theodoropoulos
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2013-11-08       Impact factor: 4.342

4.  Humeral fracture following subpectoral biceps tenodesis in 2 active, healthy patients.

Authors:  Benjamin W Sears; Edwin E Spencer; Charles L Getz
Journal:  J Shoulder Elbow Surg       Date:  2011-05-24       Impact factor: 3.019

5.  Biomechanical evaluation of subpectoral biceps tenodesis: dual suture anchor versus interference screw fixation.

Authors:  Robert Z Tashjian; Heath B Henninger
Journal:  J Shoulder Elbow Surg       Date:  2013-02-15       Impact factor: 3.019

6.  Subpectoral biceps tenodesis: a new technique using an all-suture anchor fixation.

Authors:  Wei-Ren Su; Florence Y Ling; Chih-Kai Hong; Chih-Hsun Chang; Cheng-Li Lin; I-Ming Jou
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2014-10-02       Impact factor: 4.342

7.  Modified subpectoral biceps tenodesis.

Authors:  Hatem G Said; AbdulRahman A Babaqi; Aly Mohamadean; Ahmed H Khater; Mohamed H Sobhy
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2014-01-11       Impact factor: 3.075

8.  A clinical method of functional assessment of the shoulder.

Authors:  C R Constant; A H Murley
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  1987-01       Impact factor: 4.176

9.  Results of a second attempt at surgical repair of a failed initial rotator-cuff repair.

Authors:  J K DeOrio; R H Cofield
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  1984-04       Impact factor: 5.284

10.  Repair of the rotator cuff. End-result study of factors influencing reconstruction.

Authors:  H Ellman; G Hanker; M Bayer
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  1986-10       Impact factor: 5.284

View more
  4 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.  Clinical Outcomes of an All-Arthroscopic Biceps Tenodesis Using the Anterolateral Anchor During Concomitant Double-Row Rotator Cuff Repair.

Authors:  Mitchell B Meghpara; William Schulz; Rafael A Buerba; Elan J Golan; Dharmesh Vyas
Journal:  Orthop J Sports Med       Date:  2020-10-09

3.  Modified keyhole technique for the treatment of biceps long head tendon rupture.

Authors:  Yao Huang; Hao Shu; Bing He; Fucheng Zhang; Chunsheng Zhang; Chengjian Peng; Luning Sun
Journal:  Exp Ther Med       Date:  2019-09-25       Impact factor: 2.447

4.  The high resistance loop (H-loop) technique used for all-inside arthroscopic knotless suprapectoral biceps tenodesis: A case series.

Authors:  Min Zhou; Chuanhai Zhou; Dedong Cui; Yi Long; Jiang Guo; Zhenze Zheng; Ke Meng; Jinming Zhang; Jingyi Hou; Rui Yang
Journal:  Front Surg       Date:  2022-09-14
  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.