Literature DB >> 35848181

[Comparison of the effectiveness of the long head of the biceps tendon with or without proximal amputation after arthroscopic repair of the rotator cuff].

Xing Feng1, Changjian Chen1, Liang Yang1.   

Abstract

Objective: To compare the effectiveness of the long head of the biceps tendon (LHBT) with or without proximal amputation after arthroscopic rotator cuff repair in the treatment of repairable rotator cuff tear with LHBT injury.
Methods: The clinical data of 68 patients with LHBT injury combined with supraspinatus tendon tear who met the selection criteria between January 2016 and June 2020 were retrospectively analyzed. According to whether the proximal end of LHBT was cut off or not after arthroscopic rotator cuff repair, they were divided into LHBT fixation without cutting group (group A, 32 cases) and LHBT fixation with cutting group (group B, 36 cases). There was no significant difference in gender, age, operating side, preoperative supraspinatus tear width, Constant-Murley shoulder function scale, University of California Los Angeles (UCLA) score, and visual analogue scale (VAS) score between the two groups ( P>0.05). The operation time, elbow flexion muscle strength, and postoperative complications were compared between the two groups. The Constant-Murley shoulder function scale, UCLA score, and VAS score were used to evaluate the recovery of shoulder function before operation and at 3, 6, 12 months after operation. The acromion-humeral distance (AHD) was measured by Y-view X-ray film of the shoulder joint immediately after operation and at last follow-up. AHD and acromion-greater tubercle distance (AGT) were measured by musculoskeletal ultrasound at 0°, 30°, 60°, and 90° of abduction.
Results: There was no significant difference in operation time between the two groups ( t=-0.740, P=0.463). Patients in both groups were followed up (13.0±0.7) months in group A and (13.1±0.8) months in group B, with no significant difference ( t=0.127, P=0.899). At last follow-up, the elbow flexor muscle strength of the two groups reached grade Ⅴ. Complications (including shoulder pain, deltoid atrophy, and rotator cuff re-tear) occurred in 6 patients (18.75%) in group A and 9 patients (25.00%) in group B, without neurovascular injury, surgical site infection, joint stiffness, LHBT spasmodic pain, and Popeye deformity. There was no significant difference in the incidence of complications between the two groups ( χ 2=0.385, P=0.535). The Constant-Murley shoulder function scale, UCLA score, and VAS score significantly improved in both groups at 3, 6, and 12 months after operation ( P>0.05). The above scores in group B were significantly better than those in group A at 3 and 6 months after operation ( P<0.05), and there was no significant difference between the two groups at 12 months after operation ( P>0.05). Y-view X-ray film measurement of the shoulder joint showed that the AHD of the two groups at last follow-up was less than that at immediate after operation, but the difference was not significant ( Z=-1.247, P=0.212); the AHD of group A was significantly greater than that of group B at last follow-up ( t=-2.291, P=0.025). During musculoskeletal ultrasound detection of abduction and shoulder lift, there was no significant difference in the reduction degree of AHD and AGT in group A with abduction of 0°-30° compared with group B ( P>0.05). The reduction degree of AHD and AGT in group A with abduction of 30°-60°, and the reduction degree of AGT in group A with abduction of 60°-90° were significantly smaller than those in group B ( P<0.05).
Conclusion: In arthroscopic rotator cuff repair, whether the proximal structure of LHBT is cut off or not after LHBT fixation can effectively improve the symptoms of patients and promote the recovery of shoulder joint function. Compared with preserving the proximal structure of LHBT, cutting the proximal structure of LHBT after LHBT fixation has more obvious pain relief within 6 months, and the latter had better stability above the shoulder joint.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Rotator cuff injury; acromion-humeral distance; long head of the biceps tendon; tenodesis

Mesh:

Year:  2022        PMID: 35848181      PMCID: PMC9288905          DOI: 10.7507/1002-1892.202203056

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Zhongguo Xiu Fu Chong Jian Wai Ke Za Zhi        ISSN: 1002-1892


  23 in total

Review 1.  Surgical indications for long head biceps tenodesis: a systematic review.

Authors:  Michael J Creech; Marco Yeung; Matthew Denkers; Nicole Simunovic; George S Athwal; Olufemi R Ayeni
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2014-11-23       Impact factor: 4.342

Review 2.  Long head of biceps: from anatomy to treatment.

Authors:  M Sarmento
Journal:  Acta Reumatol Port       Date:  2015 Jan-Mar       Impact factor: 1.290

3.  Tenodesis is not superior to tenotomy in the treatment of the long head of biceps tendon lesions.

Authors:  Roberto Castricini; Filippo Familiari; Marco De Gori; Daria Anna Riccelli; Massimo De Benedetto; Nicola Orlando; Olimpio Galasso; Giorgio Gasparini
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2017-06-16       Impact factor: 4.342

Review 4.  Biceps tenotomy versus tenodesis: a review of clinical outcomes and biomechanical results.

Authors:  Andrew R Hsu; Neil S Ghodadra; Matthew T Provencher; Paul B Lewis; Bernard R Bach
Journal:  J Shoulder Elbow Surg       Date:  2010-11-04       Impact factor: 3.019

5.  Biceps tenodesis versus tenotomy in isolated LHB lesions: a prospective randomized clinical trial.

Authors:  Martin Hufeland; Sabrina Wicke; Pablo E Verde; Rüdiger Krauspe; Thilo Patzer
Journal:  Arch Orthop Trauma Surg       Date:  2019-02-06       Impact factor: 3.067

6.  Improving the accuracy of the preoperative diagnosis of long head of the biceps pathology: the biceps resisted flexion test.

Authors:  Paolo Arrigoni; Vincenza Ragone; Riccardo D'Ambrosi; Patrick Denard; Filippo Randelli; Giuseppe Banfi; Paolo Cabitza; Pietro Randelli
Journal:  Joints       Date:  2014-07-08

7.  Active Scapular Retraction and Acromiohumeral Distance at Various Degrees of Shoulder Abduction.

Authors:  Gulcan Harput; Hande Guney-Deniz; İrem Düzgün; Uğur Toprak; Lori A Michener; Christopher M Powers
Journal:  J Athl Train       Date:  2018-07-02       Impact factor: 2.860

8.  Clinical Outcome of Arthroscopic Partial Repair of Large to Massive Posterosuperior Rotator Cuff Tears: Medialization of the Attachment Site of the Rotator Cuff Tendon.

Authors:  Kwang Won Lee; Gyu Sang Lee; Dae Suk Yang; Seong Ho Park; Young Sub Chun; Won Sik Choy
Journal:  Clin Orthop Surg       Date:  2020-06-29

9.  Trends in Open and Arthroscopic Long Head of Biceps Tenodesis.

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

10.  Evaluation of three-dimensional acromiohumeral distance in the standing position and comparison with its conventional measuring methods.

Authors:  Yuki Yoshida; Noboru Matsumura; Yoshitake Yamada; Minoru Yamada; Yoichi Yokoyama; Morio Matsumoto; Masaya Nakamura; Takeo Nagura; Masahiro Jinzaki
Journal:  J Orthop Surg Res       Date:  2020-09-23       Impact factor: 2.359

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.