medigraphic.com
ISSN 2992-8036 (Electronic)
ISSN 2306-4102 (Print)
Órgano Oficial del Colegio Mexicano de Ortopedia y Traumatología

2023, Number 5

<< Back Next >>

Acta Ortop Mex 2023; 37 (5)

Arthroscopic biceps tenodesis with a «relaxed» technique.Clinical and radiological results of a prospective cohort

Zanolli N, Bernal N, Rojas N, Calvo A, Valenti P, Reinares F

Language: Spanish
References: 24
Page: 283-289
PDF size: 274.82 Kb.


ABSTRACT

Introduction: in the treatment the long head of the biceps tendon (LHBT) pathology, the «relaxed tenodesis» is an arthroscopic articular suprapectoral tenodesis that seeks to lower the tension on the LHBT, and therefore, theoretically avoid persistent pain. Objective: to assess clinical and radiological results of «relaxed» tenodesis in a prospective cohort of patient with work related illness. Material and methods: prospective cohort, 54 shoulders with «relaxed» tenodesis performed with an intra-articular interference screw by the same surgeon, from October 2014 to 2018, in a level 1 trauma center. Demographic, clinical, functional and radiologic results were analyzed. On 6 months follow-up, a sonographic and clinical assessment was performed. Results: mean age 49 ± 9, mean follow-up 16 ± 4 months. The main diagnosis was a rotator cuff tear in 79%, primary biceps pathology in 10% and other pathologies in 11%. At the end of follow-up, the cohort showed active anterior elevation 157.7 ± 22.7, external rotation 47 ± 16.6, median internal rotation T12, Constant Score 83 ± 12.05 points, subjective shoulder value 83 ± 12.97% and pain visual analogue scale 1.4 ± 1.7 points. One patient had a biceps tear and two had cosmetic arm asymmetry. On ultrasound 98% had the LHBT in situ and 10% had inflammatory changes on the bicipital groove. There were complications in 21% of the sample. Conclusions: «relaxed biceps tenodesis» is a technique that shows good clinical, functional and sonographic results, with low failure rate.


REFERENCES

  1. Angelo RL. Surgical management of proximal long head biceps tendon disorders. Sports Med Arthrosc Rev. 2018; 26(4): 176-80.

  2. Werner BC, Holzgrefe RE, Brockmeier SF. Arthroscopic surgical techniques for the management of proximal biceps injuries. Clin Sports Med. 2016; 35(1): 113-35. doi: 10.1016/j.csm.2015.08.001.

  3. Lalehzarian SP, Agarwalla A, Liu JN. Management of proximal biceps tendon pathology. World J Orthop. 2022; 13(1): 36-57. doi: 10.5312/WJO.V13.I1.36.

  4. Ge HGA, Zhang Q, Sun Y, Li J, Sun L, Cheng B. Tenotomy or tenodesis for the long head of biceps lesions in shoulders3/28/2015 6:11:18 PMA systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS One. 2015; 10(3): 1-11. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0121286.

  5. Gurnani N, van Deurzen DFP, Janmaat VT, van den Bekerom MPJ. Tenotomy or tenodesis for pathology of the long head of the biceps brachii: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Knee Surgery, Sport Traumatol Arthrosc. 2016; 24(12): 3765-71. doi:10.1007/s00167-015-3640-6

  6. Abraham VT, Tan BHM, Kumar VP. Systematic review of biceps tenodesis: arthroscopic versus open. Arthroscopy. 2016; 32(2): 365-71. doi: 10.1016/j.arthro.2015.07.028.

  7. Mccrum CL, Alluri RK, Batech M, Mirzayan R. Complications of biceps tenodesis based on location, fixation, and indication : a review of 1,526 shoulders. J Shoulder Elb Surg. 2018. doi: 10.1016/j.jse.2018.09.005.

  8. Apivatgaroon A, Chernchujit B. All-arthroscopic long head of the biceps transfer: an optional technique for soft-tissue biceps tenodesis. Arthrosc Tech. 2020; 9(5): e611-5. doi: 10.1016/j.eats.2020.01.015.

  9. Saltzman BM, Leroux TS, Cotter EJ, et al. Trends in open and arthroscopic long head of biceps tenodesis. HSS J. 2020; 16(1): 2-8. doi: 10.1007/s11420-018-9645-1.

  10. Dekker TJ, Peebles LA, Preuss FR, Goldenberg BT, Dornan GJ, Provencher MT. A systematic review and meta-analysis of biceps tenodesis fixation strengths: fixation type and location are biomechanically equivalent. Arthroscopy. 2020; 36(12): 3081-91. doi: 10.1016/j.arthro.2020.05.055.

  11. Patel KV, Bravman J, Vidal A, Chrisman A, McCarty E. Biceps tenotomy versus tenodesis. Clin Sports Med. 2016; 35(1): 93-111. doi: 10.1016/j.csm.2015.08.008.

  12. Richards DP, Burkhart SS. A Biomechanical analysis of two biceps tenodesis fixation techniques. Arthroscopy. 2005; 21(7): 861-6. doi: 10.1016/j.arthro.2005.03.020.

  13. Mazzocca AD, Bicos J, Santangelo S, Romeo AA, Arciero RA. The biomechanical evaluation of four fixation techniques for proximal biceps tenodesis. Arthroscopy. 2005; 21(11): 1296-306. doi: 10.1016/j.arthro.2005.08.008.

  14. Haupt ET, O'Keefe K, Farmer K. Arthroscopic all-inside biceps tenodesis: technique and outcomes. Arthrosc Tech. 2019; 8(12): e1485-e1489. doi: 10.1016/j.eats.2019.07.034.

  15. Jackson GR, Meade J, Coombes K, et al. Onlay versus inlay biceps tenodesis for long head of biceps tendinopathy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Am Acad Orthop Surg Glob Res Rev. 2022; 6(12). doi: 10.5435/jaaosglobal-d-22-00255.

  16. Ergün S, C?rd? YU, Baykan SE, Akgün U, Karahan M. Clinical outcome comparison of suprapectoral and subpectoral tenodesis of the long head of the biceps with concomitant rotator cuff repair: a systematic review. Shoulder Elb. 2022; 14(1): 6-15. doi: 10.1177/1758573221989089.

  17. Van Deurzen DFP, Gurnani N, Alta TDW, Willems JH, Onstenk R, van den Bekerom MPJ. Suprapectoral versus subpectoral tenodesis for Long Head Biceps Brachii tendinopathy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res. 2020; 1-8. doi: 10.1016/j.otsr.2020.01.004.

  18. Brady PC, Narbona P, Adams CR, et al. Arthroscopic proximal biceps tenodesis at the articular margin: evaluation of outcomes, complications, and revision rate. Arthroscopy. 2015; 31(3): 470-6. doi: 10.1016/j.arthro.2014.08.024.

  19. Valenti P, Benedetto I, Maqdes A, Lima S, Moraiti C. "Relaxed" Biceps proximal tenodesis: An arthroscopic technique with decreased residual tendon tension. Arthrosc Tech. 2014; 3(5): e639-41. doi: 10.1016/j.eats.2014.07.005.

  20. Aida HF, Shi BY, Huish EG, McFarland EG, Srikumaran U. Are implant choice and surgical approach associated with biceps tenodesis construct strength? A systematic review and meta-regression. Am J Sports Med. 2020; 48(5): 1273-80. doi: 10.1177/0363546519876107.

  21. Lutton DM, Gruson KI, Harrison AK, Gladstone JN, Flatow EL. Where to tenodese the biceps: Proximal or distal? Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2011; 469(4): 1050-5. doi: 10.1007/s11999-010-1691-z.

  22. Forsythe B, Zuke WA, Puzzitiello RN, Romeo AA. Arthroscopic suprapectoral biceps tenodesis with tenodesis screw. Arthrosc Tech. 2018; 7(5): e417-22. doi: 10.1016/j.eats.2017.10.015.

  23. Kerschbaum M, Scheuermann M, Gerhardt C, Scheibel M. Arthroscopic knotless suprapectoral tenodesis of the long head of biceps: clinical and structural results. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2016; 136(8): 1135-42. doi: 10.1007/s00402-016-2466-0.

  24. Sasaki Y, Ochiai N, Kenmoku T, et al. Arthroscopic tenodesis using a bioabsorbable interference screw and soft anchor: a case series of 60 patients. J Orthop Sci. 2020; 25(3): 410-5. doi: 10.1016/j.jos.2019.05.005.



EVIDENCE LEVEL

II




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com