Long-term results after SLAP repair: a 5-year follow-up study of 107 patients with comparison of patients aged over and under 40 years

Biceps Tenodesis Has Greater Expected Value Than Repair for Isolated Type II SLAP Tears: A Meta-analysis and Expected-Value Decision Analysis

PURPOSE

To use an expected-value decision analysis to determine the optimal treatment decision between repair and biceps tenodesis (BT) for an isolated type II SLAP injury.

METHODS

An expected-value decision analysis with sensitivity analysis was performed to systematically quantify the clinical decision. To determine outcome probabilities, a decision tree was constructed (repair vs BT) and a meta-analysis was conducted. To determine outcome utilities, we evaluated 70 patients with a chief complaint of shoulder pain regarding age, sex, Shoulder Activity Level, and visual analog scale score in terms of potential outcome preferences. Statistical fold-back analysis was performed to determine the optimal treatment. One-way sensitivity analysis determined the effect of changing the reinjury rate on the expected value of BT.

RESULTS

The overall expected value was 8.66 for BT versus 7.19 for SLAP repair. One-way sensitivity analysis showed that BT was the superior choice if reinjury rates were expected to be lower than 28%. Meta-analysis of 23 studies and 908 patients revealed that the probability of a "well" outcome was significantly greater for BT (87.8%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 74.9%-94.6%; I² = 0.0%) than for SLAP repair (62.9%; 95% CI, 55.9%-69.3%; I² = 65.9%; P = .0023). The rate of reinjury was 1.5% for BT (95% CI, 0.05%-33.8%; I² = 0.0%) and 6.4% for repair (95% CI, 4.2%-9.6%; I² = 24%), which was not statistically significantly different (P = .411). A total of 50 participants (mean age, 25.4 years [standard deviation, 8.9 years]; 76% male patients; 50% overhead athletes) met the inclusion criteria. Forty-six percent of participants had a high Shoulder Activity Level score.

CONCLUSIONS

Decision analysis showed that BT is preferred over repair for an isolated type II SLAP tear based on greater expected value of BT versus repair. Meta-analysis showed more frequent favorable outcomes with BT. Surgeons can use this information to tailor discussions with patients.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV, meta-analysis of Level I-IV studies.

High Rate of Satisfaction and Return to Play at 5-Year Follow-Up After Arthroscopic Superior-Labrum Anterior-Posterior Repairs

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the outcomes of patients 5 years postoperatively following arthroscopic SLAP repair, and to evaluate factors associated with satisfaction.

METHODS

A retrospective review of patients who underwent SLAP repair with a minimum of 5-year follow-up was performed. Recurrence, visual analog scale (VAS) score, Subjective Shoulder Value (SSV), American Shoulder & Elbow Surgeons (ASES) score, satisfaction, whether they would undergo the same surgery again, and the rate, level and timing of return to play (RTP) were evaluated. Multilinear regression models were used to evaluate factors affecting postoperative satisfaction.

RESULTS

Overall, 122 patients who underwent SLAP repair were included, with a mean age of 33.4 years. 81% were males, and 58.2% were participating in sport preoperatively. The mean follow-up was 86.4 ± 14.4 months. At final follow up, the mean satisfaction was 87.7%, and the mean SSV was 82.9. Overall, the rate of RTP was 85.9%, with 64.8% returning at the same level at a mean of 10.5 ± 8 months. Ultimately, 13 (10.7%) patients had a further surgery, including 10 (8.2%) patients that had a biceps tenodesis. VAS during sport (P = .025), SSV (P < .001), and time to RTP (P = .0056), were associated with higher satisfaction.

CONCLUSION

There was a high rate of satisfaction at 5-year follow-up, with excellent patient-reported outcomes but with one-tenth of patients requiring revision surgeries. Additionally, while there was an overall high rate of RTP, there was only a modest rate of RTP at their preinjury level, and overhead athletes took longer to RTP.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV, case series.

Postoperative Pain and Paresthesia in Labral Repairs of the Shoulder: Location Does Matter

Background:

Favorable outcomes have been reported regarding postoperative shoulder pain and function after repair of anteroinferior (Bankart) glenohumeral labral tears. However, the outcomes of patients after repair of isolated superior labral anterior-posterior (SLAP) tears are a contentious topic. The authors have also anecdotally noted that patients evaluated with labral tears complained of numbness and tingling in their ipsilateral hand.

Purpose:

To determine if there is a difference in the temporal outcomes of shoulder pain and hand paresthesia in patients with SLAP tears versus Bankart tears after arthroscopic repair.

Study Design:

Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3.

Methods:

Included were 66 consecutive patients who underwent arthroscopic labral repair at a single institution between August 2018 and February 2021. The prevalence and magnitude of shoulder pain as well as numbness and tingling of the hand were assessed using questions from the L’Insalata Shoulder Questionnaire and the Boston Carpal Tunnel Questionnaire preoperatively and at 1 week, 6 weeks, 12 weeks, and 6 months after surgery.

Results:

Preoperatively, patients with SLAP lesions reported a higher prevalence of shoulder pain during sleep compared with those with Bankart tears (P < .05). Postoperatively, patients who underwent SLAP repair reported a larger proportion and more severe magnitude of shoulder pain during rest, overhead activities, and sleep compared with those who underwent Bankart repair (P < .05). Only patients who underwent Bankart repair reported improvements in the prevalence and magnitude of their shoulder pain during rest, overhead activities, and sleep by 6 months postoperatively compared with preoperative levels (P < .05). Preoperatively, 30% of patients with Bankart repairs and 40% of patients with SLAP repairs reported hand tingling, while 35% and 50%, respectively, reported hand numbness. The prevalence and magnitude of hand tingling and numbness were not significantly different between groups at any time point.

Conclusion:

Study results indicated that patients who underwent SLAP repair experienced worse shoulder pain outcomes compared with those who underwent Bankart repair using the same anchor and surgical technique. Only patients who underwent Bankart repair reported improvements in their hand numbness after surgery. Therefore, labral tear location does matter with respect to shoulder pain and hand numbness.

Arthroscopic evaluation of failed primary type II SLAP lesion repair in patients with high physical activity over 40 years of age and the outcomes of tenotomy

Objectives

In this study, we aimed to examine patients over 40 years of age who underwent failed primary isolated type 2 superior labrum anterior posterior (SLAP) repair arthroscopically and to evaluate the outcomes of tenotomy.

Patients and methods

Between March 2011 and December 2019, a total of 32 patients (19 males, 13 females; median age: 55.1 years; range, 41 to 59 years) who underwent primary repair for SLAP due to high activity levels and in whom the treatment failed were retrospectively analyzed. Biceps tenotomy was applied to all patients. The Constant-Murley Score (CMS), Visual Analog Scale (VAS) pain scores, and muscle strength before and after re-arthroscopy were compared.

Results

The median follow-up time was 27 (9-84) months after biceps tenotomy. During arthroscopy, failure was detected in three (9.37%) patients and additional pathologies were detected in five (15.62%) patients. Patients with biceps tenosynovitis were 29 (90.62%). The mean pre- and postoperative CMS scores were 40.5±11.1 and 86.3±8.1, respectively (p<0.001). The mean pre- and postoperative VAS-pain scores were 7.3±1.5 and 2.1±0.8, respectively (p<0.001).

Conclusion

Although the primary repair technique has been successfully performed in patients with SLAP lesions over 40 years of age and high physical activity, the clinical outcomes are unsatisfactory. Biceps tenotomy improves functional and clinical results in patients with SLAP lesions who do not benefit from primary repair.

Variability in Rehabilitation Protocols after Superior Labrum Anterior Posterior Surgical Repair

Introduction

Rehabilitation after a superior labral anterior posterior (SLAP) repair is an important aspect of patient outcomes; however, no standardized rehabilitation protocol has been defined. The purpose of this paper is to assess the variability of rehabilitation after a SLAP repair to understand the need for standardization to improve patient outcomes.

Methods

Protocols for SLAP repairs were collected through a search for Academic Orthopedic Programs and a general Google search using the terms “[Program Name (if applicable)] SLAP Repair Rehab Protocol”. Protocols were compared by sling, range of motion (ROM), physical therapy, return to sport (RTS), return to throwing, and biceps engagement and tenodesis recommendations. Protocols for non-operative or generalized shoulders were excluded.

Results

Sixty protocols were included. A total of 61.7% (37/60) recommended a sling for four to six weeks and 90% (54/60) included a full ROM recommendation, but time was variable. There were different exercises recommended, but pendulum swings were recommended by 53% (32/60), submaximal isometrics by 55% (33/60), and scapular strengthening by 65% (39/60). Of the sixty protocols, 33% (20/60) recommended return to sports in 24 weeks and 38.3% (23/60) recommended allowing throwing in 16 weeks.

Conclusions

There was variability in protocols for SLAP repair, especially time until full ROM, RTS, and biceps strengthening. Time in sling and scapular strengthening were the least variable. A lack of specificity within protocols in what return to throwing meant for functional ability made it difficult to compare protocols. Considering the large number of orthopedic programs, a relatively small number had published protocols. Further studies are needed to evaluate a standardized post-operative rehabilitation for SLAP repairs to improve outcomes.

Imaging of Patients Suspected of SLAP Tear: A Cost-Effectiveness Study

Background: Superior labral anterior-to-posterior (SLAP) tears are a common shoulder pathology. While MRI is the imaging gold standard for diagnosis of this pathology, the cost-effectiveness of the common MRI strategies is unclear. Objective: The primary objective of our study was to determine the cost-effectiveness of the common MRI-based strategies used for the diagnosis of SLAP tears. Methods: We created decision analytic models from the U.S. health care system perspective over a two-year time horizon for a hypothetical patient population of 25-year-olds with a previous diagnosis of SLAP tear. We used the decision models to compare the differences in incremental cost-effectiveness of the common MRI strategies and resulting treatment applied for this patient type, which included combinations of 1.5T and 3T imaging and unenhanced MRI and MR arthrogram protocols. Input data on cost, probability, and utility estimates were obtained through a comprehensive literature search. The primary effectiveness outcome was quality-adjusted life years (QALY). Costs were estimated in 2017 U.S. dollars. Results: When all imaging strategies were considered, the unenhanced 3T MRI based imaging strategy was the preferred and dominant option over 3T MR arthrography (MRA) and 1.5T imaging (MRI/MRA). When the model was run without 3T imaging as an option, 1.5T MRA was the favored option. Probabilistic sensitivity analyses confirmed the same preferred imaging strategy results. Conclusion: An unenhanced 3T MRI based strategy is the most cost-effective imaging option for patients with suspected SLAP tear. When 3T imaging is not available, 1.5T MRA is more cost-effective than 1.5T imaging. The main driver of these results is the fact that 3T MRI and 1.5T MRA are the most specific tests in these respective scenarios which results in fewer false positives and prevents unnecessary surgeries leading to decreased costs. Clinical Impact: Our cost-effectiveness model findings complement prior diagnostic accuracy work, helping produce a more comprehensive approach to define imaging utility for the SLAP patient population for radiologists, clinicians, and patients who have access to various types of MRI options.

Repair versus biceps tenodesis for the slap tears: A systematic review

PURPOSE

The ideal treatment algorithm is still controversial for Superior Labral Anterior-Posterior (SLAP) tears. In this systematic review, we aimed to clarify and ascertain which treatment modality is effective and more usable in which conditions.

METHODS

In this systematic review, we used the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines established for systematic reviews and meta-analysis. "SLAP or Superior Labral Anterior-Posterior" and "biceps tenodesis" search terms were used in The Cochrane Library database and Pubmed from their inception to the 30th of September 2020. A total of 2326 titles were screened and 2069 articles were removed because of their ineligibility. Full texts of 14 studies were screened and finally, six were suitable for the present systematic review. Demographic details and study characteristics, patient satisfaction, functional outcomes, return to preinjury sports level, reoperation, stiffness, sling time and rehabilitation protocols were reviewed and compared between SLAP repair and biceps tenodesis groups.

RESULTS

A total of 2326 titles were screened and six studies were detected eligible. Results of 287 patients (SLAP repair: 160, Biceps Tenodesis: 127) were reviewed in included six studies. Biceps tenodesis was showed as more satisfied technique in four of the studies but the statistical comparing results of two groups were not significantly different in each study. Different functional scoring systems used in the studies were not statistically significantly different between the groups. The percentage of return to sport and preinjury level is higher in biceps tenodesis in the five studies. The total reoperation rate for SLAP repair was 19/160 (12%) and biceps tenodesis was 7/127 (6%).

CONCLUSION

The biceps tenodesis has a higher return to preinjury sports level, higher patient satisfaction and lower reoperation rates but functional scores are similar between SLAP repair groups in patients with SLAP tear.

Posterior repair of isolated type 2 superior labrum anterior-posterior lesion prevents external rotation deficiency: long-term outcome study

PURPOSE

This study aimed to evaluate the outcomes of arthroscopic type 2 superior labrum anterior-posterior (SLAP) lesion repair in the general population and compare clinical outcomes according to patient age and repair site.

METHODS

Between 2005 and 2018, patients who underwent arthroscopic repair for isolated type 2 SLAP lesions were retrospectively reviewed. Baseline characteristics, pre- and postoperative [1-year and > 2-year (final)] shoulder range-of-motion, and functional scores, comprising the pain visual analogue scale (PVAS), functional VAS, and American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) score, were evaluated. Return to overhead activities and subjective satisfaction were assessed at the final follow-up, and patients were divided by age [group YB (< 40 years] and group OB (≥ 40 years)] and repair site [group P (only posterior labrum repair) and group AP (anterior and posterior labrum repair)]. Overall patient outcomes were analysed and compared between groups.

RESULTS

This study included 54 patients (45 men) with a mean age of 37.1 ± 8.3 years. The mean follow-up was 90.8 ± 51.3 months. Two patients experienced early failure, and one patient had a ruptured biceps tendon during the follow-up period. Final functional scores improved compared to their preoperative scores in all patients, except three (all p < 0.001). Fifty patients (98.0%) were satisfied, and 39 patients (76.5%) were able to perform overhead sports without restriction. In 25 patients who attended more than 7 years of follow-up (mean, 11.3 ± 2.7 years), 21 patients (84%) had an ASES score ≥ 80, and all patients had PVAS ≤ 2. There was no significant difference in clinical outcomes between groups YB and OB. The final median external rotation was significantly more restricted in group AP than in group P (40 [25-65] vs. 60 [50-70], p = 0.002).

CONCLUSION

Arthroscopic type 2 SLAP repair induced good short- and long-term clinical outcomes, return to overhead activities, and subjective satisfaction in the general population, regardless of age, due to the careful evaluation of patient history, physical examination, and imaging studies. However, performing only posterior repair seems sufficient since anterior labral SLAP lesion repair can limit ER. Isolated type 2 SLAP lesion posterior repair only is, thus, recommended to reduce external rotation deficit risk and increase satisfaction, regardless of patient age.

STUDY DESIGN

Case series.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV.

Stiffness: friend or foe? A cohort study evaluating the effect of early postoperative stiffness on the outcomes of patients who underwent superior labral repair

BACKGROUND AND HYPOTHESIS

Postoperative stiffness is a commonly reported complication after type II superior labrum anterior-posterior (SLAP) repair. It is unclear whether patients with postoperative stiffness, classified as external rotation to the side of ≤20°, ultimately will have greater functional outcomes at ≥2 years after surgery. We hypothesized that postoperative stiffness would result in improved functional outcomes at ≥2 years after surgery.

METHODS

Sixty-five consecutive arthroscopic SLAP repair cases performed by a single surgeon were retrospectively reviewed using prospectively collected patient-ranked outcomes and examiner-determined assessments preoperatively and at 1 week, 6 weeks, 24 weeks, and a minimum of 2 years after surgery. Patients were allocated to the stiff group and the non-stiff group based on their external rotation at 6 weeks after repair.

RESULTS

Of the patients, 16 (27%) had ≤20° of external rotation at 6 weeks postoperatively. These patients, comprising the stiff group, had more pain and more difficulty with overhead activities early on than patients in the non-stiff group (very severe vs. severe, P < .05), but by 2 years, they had less difficulty and less pain with overhead activities, less patient-reported stiffness, and less severe pain at night than isolated SLAP repair patients with >20° of external rotation at 6 weeks (P < .05).

CONCLUSION

This study suggests that in patients who underwent SLAP repair, early postoperative stiffness (at 6 weeks as assessed by ≤20° of external rotation), while problematic early, is associated with improved functional outcomes in the longer term, with patients in the stiff group reporting less pain and difficulty with overhead activities at ≥2 years after surgery.

Biceps Tenodesis for Superior Labrum Anterior-Posterior Tear in the Overhead Athlete: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Superior labrum anterior-posterior (SLAP) lesion is a common shoulder injury, particularly in overhead athletes. While surgical management has traditionally consisted of SLAP repair, high rates of revision and complications have led to alternative techniques, such as biceps tenodesis (BT). While BT is commonly reserved for older nonoverhead athletes, indications for its use have expanded in recent years.

PURPOSE

To determine functional outcomes and return-to-sport rates among overhead athletes after BT for SLAP tear.

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic review.

METHODS

A systematic review was performed for any articles published before July 2019. The search phrase "labral tear" was used to capture maximum results, followed by keyword inclusion of "SLAP tear" and "biceps tenodesis." Inclusion criteria included outcome studies of BT for isolated SLAP tear in athletes participating in any overhead sports, not limited to throwing alone. Abstracts and manuscripts were independently reviewed to determine eligibility. When clearly delineated, outcome variables from multiple studies were combined.

RESULTS

After full review, 8 articles met inclusion criteria (99 athletes; mean age, 19.8-47 years), with baseball and softball players the most common among them (n = 62). Type II SLAP tear was the most common diagnosis, and 0% to 44% of athletes had a failed previous SLAP repair before undergoing BT. Only 1 study included patients with concomitant rotator cuff repair. Open subpectoral BT was most commonly used, and complication rates ranged from 0% to 14%, with wound erythema, traumatic biceps tendon rupture, brachial plexus neurapraxia, and adhesive capsulitis being reported. Combined reported postoperative functional scores were as follows: American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons, 81.7 to 97; 12-Item Short Form Health Survey physical, 50 to 54; visual analog scale for pain, 0.8-1.5; Kerlan Jobe Orthopaedic Clinic, 66 to 79; and satisfaction, 80% to 87%. The overall return-to-sports rate for overhead athletes was 70% (60 of 86). For studies that clearly delineated outcomes based on level of play/athlete, the combined return-to-sports rate was 69% (11 of 16) for recreational overhead athletes, 80% (4 of 5) for competitive/collegiate athletes, and 60% (18 of 30) for professionals.

CONCLUSION

BT in the overhead athlete offers encouraging functional outcomes and return-to-sports rates, particularly in the recreational athlete. It can be successfully performed as an index operation rather than SLAP repair, as well as in a younger patient population. Careful consideration should be given to elite overhead athletes, particularly pitchers, who tend to experience poorer outcomes.

The glenoid labrum: does labral lesion location matter?

Background

The glenoid labrum can be torn in 1 or more locations. It is undetermined if the location of the labral tear alters patient outcomes after repair.

Methods

A total of 252 labral repair cases were retrospectively reviewed using prospectively collected patient-ranked outcomes and examiner-determined assessments preoperatively, at 1 week, 6 weeks, 24 weeks, and at a minimum of 2 years after surgery.

Results

Preoperatively, patients who underwent a superior labral repair reported worse pain at night and during activity than patients who subsequently underwent an isolated anterior labral repair or a combined anterior and superior labral repair (P < .05). After surgery, patients who underwent an isolated superior labral repair reported more severe pain at night and during activity, increased stiffness, and less satisfaction with their shoulder than patients who had an isolated anterior (P < .05) or a combined anterior and superior labral repair (P < .05).

Conclusions

Patients with isolated superior labral repairs have more pain both before and after repair than patients who undergo anterior or anterior and superior labral repairs.

Comparison between SLAP Repair and Biceps Tenodesis with Concomitant Rotator Cuff Repair in Patients Older than 45 Years: Minimum 2-Year Clinical and Imaging Outcomes

Backgroud

There is controversy over how to surgically treat symptomatic superior labrum anterior to posterior (SLAP) tears in middle-aged patients with concomitant rotator cuff tears. The aim of the study was to compare the clinical and imaging outcomes of SLAP repair versus biceps tenodesis (BT) each combined with arthroscopic rotator cuff repair (ARCR).

Methods

We retrospectively reviewed 35 patients older than 45 years who underwent arthroscopic surgery to manage concomitant SLAP tears and rotator cuff tears. In addition to ARCR, 17 patients underwent SLAP repair, whereas 18 patients underwent BT. Shoulder range of motion (ROM), visual analog scale (VAS) for pain, American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) score, Constant score, and University of California at Los Angeles (UCLA) score were used for clinical assessment. The integrity of rotator cuff repair and change of superior labrum-biceps complex were evaluated by postoperative magnetic resonance imaging (MRI).

Results

There was significant improvement in the pain VAS and all functional scores in both groups (p < 0.001) at a mean followup of 29.4 ± 11.4 months (range, 24–84 months) postoperatively. Shoulder ROM showed significant improvement postoperatively (p < 0.05). No significant difference in outcomes could be found between the 2 groups after surgery. The retear rate of rotator cuff repair on MRI was 11.8% in the SLAP repair group and 11.1% in the BT group.

Conclusions

In middle-aged patients with combined SLAP lesions and rotator cuff tears, both SLAP repair and BT can be safe adjuncts to ARCR.

Adolescent Posterior-Superior Glenoid Labral Pathology: Does Involvement of the Biceps Anchor Make a Difference?

BACKGROUND

Adolescent athletes are at risk of sustaining an injury to the posterior and superior labrum of the glenoid. Limited information is available regarding the outcomes of surgical intervention in this specific age cohort.

PURPOSE

To compare those patients with pure posterior pathology and those with posterior labral tears that involve the biceps anchor (superior labrum anterior-posterior [SLAP] tears) to determine risks for failure in the surgical management.

STUDY DESIGN

Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3.

METHODS

A retrospective review was performed on all patients under the age of 19 years over an 8-year period to identify those treated for superior and posterior labral pathology, followed by chart review, radiographic review, and arthroscopic findings. Patient characteristics and other variables were recorded, including cause (traumatic vs atraumatic), activity/sports (overhead vs nonoverhead), involvement of the biceps anchor-crossing the 12-o'clock position (posterior vs SLAP), associated pathologies, outcome scores (Single Assessment Numerical Evaluation [SANE] and Pediatric/Adolescent Shoulder Survey [PASS] scores), and complications.

RESULTS

Forty-eight patients (30 boys, 18 girls) with a mean age at surgery of 16.5 years (range, 13.5-19 years) were identified who met criteria, with a mean follow-up of 4.1 years (range, 1.3-6.9 years). Nineteen patients had SLAP tears and 29 patients had posterior tears. All but 2 regularly participated in sports at the time of their injury; of the athletes, 26 (56.5%) played an overhead sport and 20 (43.5%) played a nonoverhead sport. The cause of the injury was traumatic in 25 cases (52.1%) and atraumatic in 23 cases (47.9%). Outcome scores were not significantly different between cause or type of sports played; SANE scores were not significantly different by tear type (mean SLAP score, 88.4 compared with mean posterior score, 80.9; P = .124); but the mean PASS score in the SLAP group was 88.7, compared with 76.2 in the posterior group (P = .005) at final assessment. Only 1 SLAP patient had failed management (5.3%) compared with 5 patients in the posterior-only cohort (17.2%).

CONCLUSION

Posterior SLAP tears have better outcomes and lower failure rates than posterior-only tears in the adolescent population. Posterior-superior labral tears can occur in all sports types with multiple causes, but the only factor that appears to play a role in ultimate outcome is whether the tear crosses under the biceps anchor to the anterior side.

Return to Sport After Arthroscopic Superior Labral Anterior-Posterior Repair: A Systematic Review

CONTEXT

Superior labral anterior-posterior (SLAP) lesions often result in significant sporting limitations for athletes. Return to sport is a significant outcome that often needs to be considered by athletes undergoing the procedure.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate return to sport among individuals undergoing arthroscopic SLAP repair.

DATA SOURCES

Four databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, PubMed, and Cochrane) were searched from database inception through January 29, 2018.

STUDY SELECTION

English-language articles reporting on return-to-activity rates after arthroscopic SLAP repairs were included.

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic review.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level 4.

DATA EXTRACTION

Data including patient demographics, surgical procedure, and return to activity were extracted. The methodological quality of included studies was evaluated using the Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies (MINORS) tool.

RESULTS

Of 1938 screened abstracts, 22 articles involving a total of 944 patients undergoing arthroscopic SLAP repair met inclusion criteria. Of the total included patients, 270 were identified as overhead athletes, with 146 pitchers. Across all patients, 69.6% (657/944 patients) of individuals undergoing arthroscopic SLAP repair returned to sport. There was a 69.0% (562/815 patients) return to previous level of play, with a mean time to return to sport of 8.9 ± 2.4 months (range, 6.0-11.7 months). The return-to-sport rate for pitchers compared with the return-to-activity rate for nonpitchers, encompassing return to work and return to sport, was 57.5% (84/146 patients) and 87.1% (572/657 patients), respectively, after arthroscopic SLAP repair.

CONCLUSION

Arthroscopic SLAP repair is associated with a fair return to sport, with 69.6% of individuals undergoing arthroscopic SLAP repair returning to sport. SLAP repair in pitchers has significantly decreased return to sport in comparison with nonpitching athletes. Athletes on average return to sport within 9 months postoperatively.

Is arthroscopic repair superior to biceps tenotomy and tenodesis for type II SLAP lesions? A meta-analysis of RCTs and observational studies

Objective

Labral repair and biceps tenotomy and tenodesis are routine operations for type II superior labrum anterior posterior (SLAP) lesion of the shoulder, but evidence of their superiority is lacking. We conducted this systematic review and meta-analysis to compare the clinical outcomes of arthroscopic repair versus biceps tenotomy and tenodesis intervention.

Methods

The eight studies were acquired from PubMed, Medline, Embase, CNKI, and Cochrane Library. The data were extracted by two of the coauthors independently and were analyzed by RevMan 5.3. Mean differences (MDs), odds ratios (ORs), and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated. Cochrane Collaboration’s Risk of Bias Tool and Newcastle–Ottawa Scale were used to assess risk of bias.

Results

Eight studies including two randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and six observational studies were assessed. The methodological quality of the trials ranged from low to moderate. The pooled results of UCLA score, SST score, and complications showed that the differences were not statistically significant between the two interventions. The difference of ASES score and satisfaction rate was statistically significant between arthroscopic repair and biceps tenotomy and tenodesis intervention, and arthroscopic biceps tenotomy and tenodesis treatment was more effective. Sensitivity analysis proved the stability of the pooled results, and there were too less included articles to verify the publication bias.

Conclusions

Both arthroscopic repair and biceps tenotomy and tenodesis interventions had benefits in type II SLAP lesions. Arthroscopic biceps tenotomy and tenodesis treatment provides better clinical outcome in ASES score and satisfaction rate and comparable complications compared with arthroscopic repair treatment. In view of the heterogeneity and confounding factors, whether these conclusions are applicable should be further determined in future studies.

Effect of Anterior Anchor on Clinical Outcomes of Type II SLAP Repairs in an Active Population

This study evaluated the role of anchor position in persistence of pain and/or revision biceps tenodesis after arthroscopic repair of type II superior labrum anterior and posterior (SLAP) lesions and assessed for patient- and injury-specific variables influencing clinical outcomes. Active-duty service members who underwent arthroscopic repair of type II SLAP lesions between March 1, 2007, and January 23, 2012, were identified. Patients with less than 2-year clinical follow-up; type I, III, and IV SLAP lesions; and primary treatment with biceps tenodesis and/or rotator cuff repair at the time of index surgery were excluded. Demographic, preoperative, and operative variables, including anchor positions, were reviewed and evaluated for association with outcomes. Total failure rate (defined as either surgical and/or clinical failure), anchor position, and return to military function were the primary outcomes of interest. Forty-nine patients underwent type II SLAP repairs with a mean follow-up of 52.3 months. Forty-eight (97.9%) were men, and mean age was 35.2 years. Eleven patients (22%) underwent subsequent subpectoral biceps tenodesis. Forty patients (82%) returned to military function, whereas 9 patients (18%) had medical discharge for significant, rate-limiting, shoulder pain. Age was a significant predictor of surgical failure. Patients with anchor position anterior to the biceps attachment had no increased risk of clinical or surgical failure compared with patients with only posterior-based anchors. Anchor placement anterior to the biceps tendon was not associated with inferior outcomes. Younger age was shown to be a poor prognostic factor in patients' ability to return to active duty. Revision with biceps tenodesis showed significant utility in achieving good clinical outcomes and return to duty in more than 90% of patients. Patient-, injury-, and surgery-specific variables need to be identified as prognostic indicators so that clinical outcomes can continue to be improved. [Orthopedics. 2019; 42(1):e32-e38.].

Effectiveness of biceps tenodesis versus SLAP repair for surgical treatment of isolated SLAP lesions: A systemic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Type II superior labrum anterior and posterior (SLAP) lesions could induce chronic shoulder pain and impaired movement. Current management of Type II SLAP lesions consists of two well-established surgical procedures: arthroscopic biceps tenodesis and SLAP repair. However, which technique is preferred over the other is still a controversy.

METHODS

We performed a systematic electronic database search on Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE and Embase to identify articles equating superior labral repair with biceps tenodesis, which were reported before August 2017 which included the phrase "superior labral anterior posterior" or "SLAP." The randomised controlled clinical trials that met our criteria were evaluated for quality of methodology. The results obtained were further analysed and correlated to present the benefits and drawbacks comparing the two SLAP repair surgical procedures.

RESULT

Based on our inclusion and exclusion criteria, we identified five articles (204 patients) that were included in this meta-analysis. The results indicate that prevalence of patients return to preinjury sports level and the patients satisfaction were found to be significantly better in tenodesis group than in the SLAP repair group (p < 0.05). As for the patient age, VAS score, American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score, University of California at Los Angeles score, postoperative stiffness and reoperation rates, no significant differences were evident among the two groups, thus supporting the results reported in the current literatures (p > 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Both the surgical treatments, SLAP repair and the biceps tenodesis, are efficacious in pain alleviation and recovery of shoulder function. But, compared with SLAP repair, biceps tenodesis showed higher rate of patient satisfaction and return to preinjury sports participation.

THE TRANSLATIONAL POTENTIAL OF THIS ARTICLE

Impart better understanding regarding discrepancies in the outcomes between biceps tenodesis and SLAP repair in treating patients with isolated Type II SLAP lesions.

Superior Capsular Release After Failed Combined Superior Labral Repair And Biceps Tenodesis For Slap Tear

Introduction:

Optimal treatment of type II superior labrum anterior and posterior (SLAP) tears is controversial. There has been a recent trend towards biceps tenodesis over SLAP repair in older patients. Few surgeons have performed combined biceps tenodesis and SLAP repair with inferior results.

Case Report:

This case describes a 46-year-old patient who had persistent pain and stiffness after combined biceps tenodesis and SLAP repair for a type II SLAP tear. His pain and motion improved after arthroscopic superior capsular release.

Conclusion:

Failed SLAP repair is often multifactorial and a thorough workup is needed. Combined biceps tenodesis and SLAP repair can cause pain, stiffness, and dysfunction which can be successfully treated with arthroscopic superior capsular release.

An Age and Activity Algorithm for Treatment of Type II SLAP Tears

Background

Type II SLAP tears predominantly occur in males between their third and fifth decades of life. The mechanism of injury is often repeated overheard activity but can also occur due to direct compression loads and traction injuries. The treatment options have changed over the years and include non-operative therapy, direct labral-biceps complex repair, and labral debridement with biceps tenodesis or tenotomy.

Objective

To review the existing literature on the management of Type II SLAP tears and provide clinical recommendations based on patient age and activity level.

Methods

A review of the existing literature through October 2017 investigating the management of Type II SLAP tears was performed. Emphasis was placed on distinguishing the outcomes based on age and activity level to provide an appropriate treatment algorithm.

Results

Patients with Type II SLAP tears should first be trialed with non-operative management and many patients will have a successful result with ability to return to their respective sports or activities. Surgical management should be considered if non-operative management does not provide symptomatic relief. Young, athletic, or high-demand patients should be treated with a SLAP repair while biceps tenodesis should be considered for older or worker's compensation patients. Patients undergoing revision surgery for a failed SLAP repair should be managed with biceps tenodesis.

Conclusion

Type II SLAP tears remain a difficult pathology to manage clinically, but the treatment indications are narrowing. The age and activity algorithm described in this review provides an effective method of managing this complex clinical condition.

SLAP lesions, An Opinion Piece

SLAP lesions were first classified by Snyder in 1990. Results of treatment have been controversial without clear consensus. All have agreed that prospective studies would be useful. We conducted such a study between 2008 to 2114 that randomized treatment between sham surgery, biceps tenodesis and labral repair. No significant differences in results between the groups were found. Crossover between groups was only possible from the sham surgery group and this may introduce some degree of bias. However, the six month outcomes between all three groups before any crossover were statistically identical. Our results also do not favor biceps tenodesis versus SLAP repair when surgery is performed. Based on these results we have narrowed our indications for SLAP lesion surgery. We still treat some SLAP lesions surgically and individualize our treatment in each such cases. Most SLAP lesion patients, however, are ultimately treated non-operatively.

Arthroscopic Decompression of Spinoglenoid Notch Cyst and SLAP Repair Through a Single Working Portal

A SLAP lesion can be found with a concomitant spinoglenoid notch cyst. The cyst can cause suprascapular nerve compression, resulting in shoulder pain and weakness of external rotation. Their management varies from conservative treatment to operative treatment. Cyst decompression through the labral tear is our preferred treatment. Previous studies demonstrated a good result after arthroscopic decompression of the cyst through the labral tear combined with SLAP repair. Many surgeons usually use 3 portals to perform this procedure. However, we prefer to use only 2 portals, 1 anterior viewing portal and 1 posterior working portal. This strategy is more time and cost efficient. The patient is positioned in lateral decubitus. The SLAP lesion is demonstrated by using a probe. Tissue elevator is inserted into the labral lesion to penetrate into the cyst wall. A soft anchor is placed. A birdbeak suture passer penetrates the posterior labrum. Then knot tying is done. The advantages of this single working portal technique are short operative time, a decreased risk of iatrogenic rotator cuff injury from accessory anterolateral portal or posterior labral injury from posterolateral portal, and avoiding unnecessary superior capsule incision for cyst exposure.

Treatment for Symptomatic SLAP Tears in Middle-Aged Patients Comparing Repair, Biceps Tenodesis, and Nonoperative Approaches: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis

PURPOSE

To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of nonoperative management, primary SLAP repair, and primary biceps tenodesis for the treatment of symptomatic isolated type II SLAP tear.

METHODS

A microsimulation Markov model was constructed to compare 3 strategies for middle-aged patients with symptomatic type II SLAP tears: SLAP repair, biceps tenodesis, or nonoperative management. A failed 6-month trial of nonoperative treatment was assumed. The principal outcome measure was the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio in 2017 U.S. dollars using a societal perspective over a 10-year time horizon. Treatment effectiveness was expressed in quality-adjusted life-years (QALY). Model results were compared with estimates from the published literature and were subjected to sensitivity analyses to evaluate robustness.

RESULTS

Primary biceps tenodesis compared with SLAP repair conferred an increased effectiveness of 0.06 QALY with cost savings of $1,766. Compared with nonoperative treatment, both biceps tenodesis and SLAP repair were cost-effective (incremental cost-effectiveness ratio values of $3,344/QALY gained and $4,289/QALY gained, respectively). Sensitivity analysis showed that biceps tenodesis was the preferred strategy in most simulations (52%); however, for SLAP repair to become cost-effective over biceps tenodesis, its probability of failure would have to be lower than 2.7% or the cost of biceps tenodesis would have to be higher than $14,644.

CONCLUSIONS

When compared with primary SLAP repair and nonoperative treatment, primary biceps tenodesis is the most cost-effective treatment strategy for type II SLAP tears in middle-aged patients. Primary biceps tenodesis offers increased effectiveness when compared with both primary SLAP repair and nonoperative treatment and lower costs than primary SLAP repair.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, economic decision analysis.

Subpectoral Biceps Tenodesis for Treatment of Isolated Type II SLAP Lesions in a Young and Active Population

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to evaluate outcomes following open subpectoral biceps tenodesis for the treatment of isolated type II SLAP lesions in patients 45 years of age or younger and evaluate the rate of return to sport.

METHODS

All patients included in the study were at least 2 years out from open subpectoral biceps tenodesis for treatment of an isolated type II SLAP lesion and were treated between December 2007 and March 2015. All patients older than 45, those who had prior surgery on the index shoulder, and those who had any concomitant reconstructive shoulder procedures were excluded. American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES), Quick Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (QuickDASH), Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (SANE), and Short-Form 12 Physical Component Summary (SF-12 PCS) scores were collected pre- and postoperatively along with postoperative patient satisfaction. Patient return to sport was evaluated by questionnaire.

RESULTS

Twenty patients with a mean age of 38 years (range 21-45) were included, of which 16 were available for follow-up. There was significant improvement in median pre- to postoperative outcome scores (ASES, 66-94 points, P = .001; QuickDASH, 31-8, P = .003; SANE, 60-92, P = .001, SF-12 PCS, 41-52 points, P = .002), with a median patient satisfaction of 8.5 points (range 1-10) at a mean follow-up of 3.4 years (range, 2.0-6.3 years). At final follow-up, all patients had returned to sport, with 73% of patients indicating a return to their previous or comparable level of sports. Subgroup analysis showed 80% of overhead athletes returned to the same or a comparable level postoperatively.

CONCLUSIONS

This study suggests that young patients around their 30s participating in sport at a recreational level may benefit from open subpectoral biceps tenodesis for a primary isolated SLAP II tear and would experience excellent outcomes, high satisfaction, and a high rate of return to sport.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV, therapeutic case study.

Determinants of patient satisfaction following reconstructive shoulder surgery

Background

Obtaining patient satisfaction is a key goal of surgical treatment. It was the purpose of this study to identify pre-, peri- and postoperative factors determining patient satisfaction after shoulder surgery, quantify their relative importance and thereby allow the surgeon to focus on parameters, which will influence patient satisfaction.

Methods

We retrospectively reviewed 505 patients, who underwent either rotator cuff repair (n = 216) or total shoulder arthroplasty (n = 289). We examined 21 patient-specific and socio-demographic parameters as well as 31 values of the Constant-Score with regard to their impact on patient satisfaction.

Results

In the univariable analysis higher patient satisfaction was correlated with higher age, private health insurance, light physical work, retirement, primary surgery, non-smoking, absence of chronic alcohol abuse, absence of peri- or postoperative complications, operation performed by the medical director as well as various Constant Score sub-values (p < 0.05). In the multivariable analysis absence of peri- or postoperative complications (p = 0.008), little postoperative pain (p = 0.0001), a large range of postoperative active abduction (p = 0.05) and a high postoperative subjective shoulder value (p = 0.0001) were identified as independent prognostic factors for high satisfaction.

Conclusion

After reconstructive shoulder surgery particular attention should be paid to prevention of complications, excellent perioperative pain control and restoration of abduction during rehabilitation. This study is first step towards a preoperative prediction model of a subjectively successful surgery as well as a tool to exclude irrelevant parameters in clinical routine.

Clinical outcomes of non-operative treatment for patients presenting SLAP lesions in diagnostic provocative tests and MR arthrography

PURPOSE

In the present prospective study, the functional outcomes of non-operative treatment were evaluated in patients aged between 30 and 45 years presenting SLAP lesion in diagnostic provocative tests and magnetic resonance (MR) arthrography.

METHODS

Forty-six patients with a symptomatic SLAP lesion who participated in recreational level of sports were prospectively enroled. SLAP lesion was diagnosed using combinations of several clinical tests and MR arthrography findings. All patients were treated with intra-articular corticosteroid injections, followed by rotator cuff and periscapular muscle-strengthening exercises. Patients with persistent discomfort after second injection underwent arthroscopic SLAP repair. Functional outcomes were evaluated using ASES and Constant scores, and pain and satisfaction for visual analogue scale (VAS).

RESULTS

Pain had significantly improved from 5.2 ± 2.2 to 1.0 ± 1.1 (p < 0.001) in all patients after the first corticosteroid injection. SLAP symptoms relapsed in 12 patients at an average of 2.4 months after the first injection. Symptoms were relieved in 5 of 12 patients after the second injection and strengthening exercises. The remaining seven patients underwent arthroscopic SLAP repair. Thirty-nine patients (85 %) who were treated non-operatively showed improved VAS, Constant, and ASES scores at final follow-up (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Non-operative treatment with an appropriate regimen provided satisfactory clinical outcomes in middle-aged patients with symptomatic SLAP lesions and should be considered before recommending operative treatment.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Non-operative management using combined intra-articular corticosteroid injection with rotator cuff and periscapular strengthening exercises could be applied as primary treatment for patients with symptomatic SLAP lesion who participate in recreational level of sports.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV.

Arthroscopic Knot Removal for Failed Superior Labrum Anterior-Posterior Repair Secondary to Knot-Induced Pain

BACKGROUND

Studies on failed superior labrum anterior-posterior (SLAP) repair are increasing. However, the number of reports on treatment options for failed SLAP repair remains quite low, and the clinical results vary between different study groups.

PURPOSE

To describe the clinical presentation of failed SLAP repair due to knot-induced pain and evaluate the efficacy of arthroscopic knot removal.

STUDY DESIGN

Case series; Level of evidence, 4.

METHODS

The authors retrospectively reviewed records of 11 patients (mean age, 24.6 ± 8.6 years; range, 17-43 years) with stable, healed SLAP lesions with knot-induced pain after arthroscopic fixation of unstable type II SLAP lesions. All patients demonstrated a positive compression-rotation test before knot removal. The mean follow-up duration after knot removal was 48.0 ± 37.4 months (range, 24-156 months). The mean duration between primary fixation and knot removal was 21.2 ± 14.7 months (range, 8-56 months).

RESULTS

Sharp pain (100%) and clicking (64%) were the most common symptoms. The knot was positioned on the glenoid side in 5 patients and the labral side in 6 patients. The knots on the glenoid side had associated humeral head cartilage damage. The mean University of California at Los Angeles score significantly improved from 15.2 points to 31.7 points after knot removal ( P = .003) Additionally, the mean Constant score greatly improved from a mean of 56.5 points to 89.8 points ( P = .003). At a mean of 3 weeks after surgery, we observed dramatic pain relief. Six weeks after surgery, the compression-rotation test was negative in all patients.

CONCLUSION

The most common symptom of knot-induced pain after SLAP repair was persistent sharp pain followed by clicking. The knot appears to be a cause of pain in failed SLAP repairs, and arthroscopic knot removal can provide dramatic pain relief and significant improvement of clinical outcomes.

Progression of function and pain relief as indicators for returning to sports after arthroscopic isolated type II SLAP repair-a prospective study

Background

One of the currently used surgical techniques in isolated type II SLAP lesions is arthroscopic SLAP repair. Postoperatively, patients tend to suffer from a prolonged period of pain and are restricted in their sports activities for at least 6 months. The aim of this study was to prospectively evaluate the clinical outcome as well as the postoperative course of pain after arthroscopic type II SLAP repair.

Methods

Outcome measures were assessed using the Individual Relative Constant Score (CS_indiv), the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) Score, the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), and the Short Form 36 (SF-36). Data were collected preoperatively, as well as at 3, 6, 12 and >24 months postoperatively.

Results

Eleven patients with an average age of 31.8 years (range: 22.8-49.8 years) underwent arthroscopic repair of isolated type II SLAP lesions. Mean follow-up time was 41.9 months (range: 36.1–48.4 months). 6 months after surgery, there was a statistically significant improvement of function according to the CS_indiv (p = 0.004), the ASES Score (p = 0.006), and the SF-36 subscale “physical functioning” (p = 0.014) and a statistically significant decrease of pain according to the VAS (p = 0.007) and the SF-36 subscale “bodily pain” (p = 0.022) compared to preoperative levels.

Conclusions

Arthroscopic repair of isolated type II SLAP lesions with suture anchors leads to a satisfactory functional outcome and return to pre-injury sports levels, with delayed, but significant pain relief observed 6 months after surgery. Thus, a return to sports should not be allowed earlier than 6 months after surgery, when patients have reached pain-free function and recovered strength.

Trial registration

Researchregistry1761 (UIN).

Risk Factors for Revision Surgery After Superior Labral Anterior-Posterior Repair: A National Perspective

BACKGROUND

Data regarding risk factors for revision surgery after superior labral anterior-posterior (SLAP) repair are limited to institutional series.

PURPOSE

To define risk factors for revision surgery after SLAP repair among patients in a large national database.

STUDY DESIGN

Case-control study; Level of evidence, 3.

METHODS

A national insurance database was queried for patients undergoing arthroscopic SLAP repair (Current Procedural Terminology [CPT] code 29807) for the diagnosis of a SLAP tear. Patients without a CPT modifier for laterality were excluded. Revision surgery was defined as (1) subsequent ipsilateral SLAP repair (CPT 29807), (2) ipsilateral arthroscopic debridement for the diagnosis of a SLAP tear (CPT 29822 or 29823, with diagnosis code 840.7), (3) subsequent ipsilateral arthroscopic biceps tenodesis (CPT 29828), (4) subsequent ipsilateral open biceps tenodesis (CPT 23430), and (5) subsequent biceps tenotomy (CPT 23405). Multivariable binomial logistic regression analysis was performed to identify risk factors for revision surgery after SLAP repair, including patient demographics/comorbidities, concomitant diagnoses, and concomitant procedures performed. Odds ratios (ORs), 95% CIs, and P values were calculated. The estimated financial impact of revision surgery was also calculated.

RESULTS

There were 4751 patients who met inclusion and exclusion criteria. Overall, 121 patients (2.5%) required revision surgery after SLAP repair. Regression analysis identified numerous risk factors for revision surgery, including age >40 years (OR, 1.5; 95% CI, 1.2-1.8; P = .045), female sex (OR, 1.5; 95% CI, 1.3-1.8; P = .010), obesity (OR, 1.8; 95% CI, 1.5-2.2; P = .001), smoking (OR, 2.0; 95% CI, 1.6-2.4; P < .0001), and diagnosis of biceps tendinitis (OR, 3.5; 95% CI, 3.0-4.2; P < .0001) or long head of the biceps tearing (OR, 5.1; 95% CI, 4.1-6.3; P < .0001) at or before the time of surgery. Concomitant rotator cuff repair and distal clavicle excision were not significant risk factors for revision surgery. The cost of revision surgery averaged almost $9000.

CONCLUSION

Risk factors for revision surgery after SLAP repair include age >40 years, female sex, obesity, smoking, and diagnosis of biceps tendinitis or long head of the biceps tearing. The diagnosis of biceps tendinitis (OR, 3.5) or long head of the biceps tearing (OR, 5.1) at or before the time of surgery was an especially significant risk factor for revision surgery. The high cost of revision surgery highlights the importance of appropriate indications to avoid the need for subsequent procedures.

Sham surgery versus labral repair or biceps tenodesis for type II SLAP lesions of the shoulder: a three-armed randomised clinical trial

Background

Labral repair and biceps tenodesis are routine operations for superior labrum anterior posterior (SLAP) lesion of the shoulder, but evidence of their efficacy is lacking. We evaluated the effect of labral repair, biceps tenodesis and sham surgery on SLAP lesions.

Methods

A double-blind, sham-controlled trial was conducted with 118 surgical candidates (mean age 40 years), with patient history, clinical symptoms and MRI arthrography indicating an isolated type II SLAP lesion. Patients were randomly assigned to either labral repair (n=40), biceps tenodesis (n=39) or sham surgery (n=39) if arthroscopy revealed an isolated SLAP II lesion. Primary outcomes at 6 and 24 months were clinical Rowe score ranging from 0 to 100 (best possible) and Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index (WOSI) ranging from 0 (best possible) to 2100. Secondary outcomes were Oxford Instability Shoulder Score, change in main symptoms, EuroQol (EQ-5D and EQ-VAS), patient satisfaction and complications.

Results

There were no significant between-group differences at any follow-up in any outcome. Between-group differences in Rowe scores at 2 years were: biceps tenodesis versus labral repair: 1.0 (95% CI −5.4 to 7.4), p=0.76; biceps tenodesis versus sham surgery: 1.6 (95% CI −5.0 to 8.1), p=0.64; and labral repair versus sham surgery: 0.6 (95% CI −5.9 to 7.0), p=0.86. Similar results—no differences between groups—were found for WOSI scores. Postoperative stiffness occurred in five patients after labral repair and in four patients after tenodesis.

Conclusion

Neither labral repair nor biceps tenodesis had any significant clinical benefit over sham surgery for patients with SLAP II lesions in the population studied.

Trial registration number

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00586742

Subsequent Shoulder Surgery After Isolated Arthroscopic SLAP Repair

PURPOSE

To quantify the incidence of and identify the risk factors for subsequent shoulder procedures after isolated SLAP repair.

METHODS

New York's Statewide Planning and Research Cooperative System database was searched between 2003 and 2014 to identify individuals with the sole diagnosis of a SLAP lesion who underwent isolated arthroscopic SLAP repair. Patients were longitudinally followed up for a minimum of 3 years to analyze for subsequent ipsilateral shoulder procedures.

RESULTS

Between 2003 and 2014, 2,524 patients met our inclusion criteria. After 3 to 11 years of follow-up, 10.1% of patients (254 of 2,524) underwent repeat surgical intervention on the same shoulder as the initial SLAP repair. The mean time to repeat shoulder surgery was 2.3 ± 2.1 years. Subsequent procedures included subacromial decompression (35%), debridement (26.7%). repeat SLAP repair (19.7%), and biceps tenodesis or tenotomy (13.0%). After isolated SLAP repair, patients aged 20 years or younger were more likely to undergo arthroscopic Bankart repair (odds ratio [OR], 2.91; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.36-6.21; P = .005), whereas age older than 30 years was an independent risk factor for subsequent acromioplasty (OR, 2.3; 95% CI, 1.4-3.7; P < .001) and distal clavicle resection (OR, 2.5; 95% CI, 1.1-5.5; P = .030). The need for a subsequent procedure was significantly associated with Workers' Compensation cases (OR, 2.4; 95% CI, 1.7-3.2; P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

We identified a 10.1% incidence of subsequent surgery after isolated SLAP repair, often related to an additional diagnosis, suggesting that clinicians should consider other potential causes of shoulder pain when considering surgery for patients with SLAP lesions. In addition, the number of isolated SLAP repairs performed has decreased over time, and management of failed SLAP repair has shifted toward biceps tenodesis or tenotomy over revision SLAP repair in more recent years.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, case-control study.

Arthroscopic repair of type II SLAP lesions: Clinical and anatomic follow-up

Aims:

The aim was to evaluate the clinical and anatomic outcome of arthroscopic repair of type II SLAP lesions.

Materials and Methods:

The senior author performed isolated repairs of 25 type II SLAP lesions in 25 patients with a mean age of 40.0 ± 12 years. All tears were repaired using standard arthroscopic suture anchor repair to bone. All patients were reviewed using a standardized clinical examination by a blinded, independent observer, and using several shoulder outcome measures. Patients were evaluated by magnetic resonance imaging arthrogram at a minimum of 1-year postoperatively.

Statistical Analysis Used:

Two-tailed paired t-test were used to determine significant differences in preoperative and postoperative clinical outcomes scores. In addition, a Fisher's exact test was used.

Results:

At a mean follow-up of 54-month, the mean American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Shoulder Index (ASES) scores improved from 52.1 preoperatively to 86.1 postoperatively (P < 0.0001) and the Simple Shoulder Test (SST) scores from 7.7 to 10.6 (P < 0.0002). Twenty-two out of the 25 patients (88%) stated that they would have surgery again. Of the 21 patients who had postoperative magnetic resonance imaging arthrographys (MRAs), 9 patients (43%) demonstrated dye tracking between the labrum bone interface suggestive of a recurrent tear and 12 patients (57%) had a completely intact repair. There was no significant difference in ASES, SST, and patient satisfaction scores in patients with recurrent or intact repairs.

Conclusions:

Arthroscopic repair of type II SLAP lesions demonstrated improvements in clinical outcomes. However, MRA imaging demonstrated 43% of patients with recurrent tears. MRA results do not necessarily correlate with clinical outcome.

Surgical treatment of symptomatic superior labrum anterior-posterior tears in patients older than 40 years: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Successful arthroscopic repair of symptomatic superior labral tears in young athletes has been well documented. Superior labral repair in patients older than 40 years is controversial, with concerns for residual postoperative pain, stiffness, and higher rates of revision surgery.

PURPOSE

To analyze the published data on the surgical treatment of superior labral injuries in patients aged ≥40 years, including those with concomitant injuries to the rotator cuff.

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic review.

METHODS

A systematic review of the literature was performed using the Preferred Reporting Items of Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines. The MEDLINE database via PubMed and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews were searched for articles related to superior labrum anterior-posterior (SLAP) tears. Studies were included if they met the following criteria: the study contained at least 1 group of patients who had undergone arthroscopic repair of a type II or IV SLAP lesion with a minimum 2-year follow-up, objective and/or functional scoring systems were used to evaluate postoperative outcomes, and the mean patient age was ≥40 years for at least 1 treatment arm or subgroup analysis. Studies were excluded if the article was a review or if the article included data for SLAP type I, III, or V to X tears or Bankart lesions.

RESULTS

While several authors reported equivalent outcomes of SLAP repair in patients both older than 40 years and younger than 40 years, others demonstrated significantly higher failure rates in the older cohort. Decreased patient satisfaction and increasing complications, including postoperative stiffness and reoperations, occur at higher rates as the patient age increases. The literature demonstrates that biceps tenotomy and tenodesis are reliable alternatives to SLAP repair and that biceps tenotomy is a viable revision procedure for failed SLAP repair. With concomitant rotator cuff tears, the evidence favors debridement or biceps tenotomy over SLAP repair.

CONCLUSION

While studies show that good outcomes can be obtained with SLAP repair in an older cohort of patients, age older than 40 years and workers' compensation status are independent risk factors for increased surgical complications. The cumulative evidence supports labral debridement or biceps tenotomy over labral repair when an associated rotator cuff injury is present.

Etiology, Diagnosis, and Management of Failed SLAP Repair

In general, favorable outcomes have been achieved with arthroscopic repair of superior labral anterior-posterior (SLAP) tears. However, some patients remain dissatisfied or suffer further injury after SLAP repair and may seek additional treatment to alleviate their symptoms. The cause of persistent pain or recurrent symptoms after repair is likely multifactorial; therefore, careful preoperative workup is required to elucidate the cause of pain. Review of the details of previous surgical procedures is crucial because certain fixation methods are prone to failure or can cause additional injury. Failed SLAP repair can be managed with nonsurgical or surgical options. Nonsurgical modalities include physical therapy and strengthening programs, anti-inflammatory agents, and activity modification. Surgical options include revision SLAP repair and biceps tenotomy or tenodesis with or without revision SLAP repair. Outcomes after surgical management of failed SLAP repair are inferior to those of primary repair. Select patients may be better served by primary biceps tenodesis rather than SLAP repair.

Biceps tenodesis is a viable option for salvage of failed SLAP repair

BACKGROUND

Outcomes of arthroscopic superior labral anterior-posterior (SLAP) repairs have been well reported with generally favorable outcomes. Unfortunately, a percentage of patients remain dissatisfied or suffer further injury after SLAP repair and may seek additional treatment. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the surgical outcomes of biceps tenodesis for failed SLAP repairs.

METHODS

A retrospective review of all patients undergoing biceps tenodesis was completed. Inclusion criteria were previous SLAP repair and subsequent revision biceps tenodesis. Exclusion criteria were additional shoulder procedures including rotator cuff repair, instability procedures, and preoperative frozen shoulder. Objective outcomes were postoperative assessments with Constant score, American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score, Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation, Simple Shoulder Test, and Veterans RAND 36-Item Health Survey. Physical examination was conducted to determine postoperative range of motion and strength compared with the nonoperative shoulder.

RESULTS

A cohort of 24 patients was identified, and of these, 17 patients (71%) completed the study at 2 years' follow-up. The average postoperative Constant score was 84.4; American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score, 75.5; Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation score, 73.1%; Simple Shoulder Test score, 9.2; and Veterans RAND 36-Item Health Survey score, 76.1. Postoperative range of motion of the operative shoulder returned to near that of the asymptomatic nonoperative shoulder. Workers' compensation status led to inferior results.

CONCLUSIONS

Options for patients with a failed prior SLAP repair are limited. As a salvage operation for failed SLAP repair, biceps tenodesis serves the majority of patients well, with favorable outcomes by validated measures and excellent shoulder range of motion and elbow strength at 2 years' follow-up. Workers' compensation status may predispose patients to poorer outcomes.

Surgical treatment of isolated type II superior labrum anterior-posterior (SLAP) lesions: repair versus biceps tenodesis

BACKGROUND

It is still unclear which patients with isolated type II superior labrum anterior-posterior (SLAP) lesions benefit from either superior labral repair or biceps tenodesis. This study evaluates the indications and outcomes of patients with isolated type II SLAP lesions who have undergone either procedure.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis was performed of patients who had surgery for an isolated type II SLAP lesion between 2008 and 2011. There were 25 patients: 15 underwent biceps tenodesis, with a mean follow-up of 31 months (range, 26-43 months), and 10 underwent SLAP repair, with a mean follow-up of 35 months (range, 25-52 months). The mean age was 47 years (range, 30-59 years) in the tenodesis group and 31 years (range, 21-43 years) in the repair group.

RESULTS

At latest follow-up, both groups showed significant improvements in subjective shoulder value and pain score. No difference was observed in American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score (93.0 vs 93.5, P = .45), patient satisfaction (93% vs 90%, P = .45), or return to preinjury sporting level (73% vs 60%, P = .66). Analysis of the indications for treatment showed that in the large majority, tenodesis was performed in older patients (>35 years) and patients who showed degenerative or frayed labrums whereas SLAP repairs were performed in younger and more active patients with healthy-appearing labral tissue. There was only 1 failure in the tenodesis group, and in the SLAP repair group, there were 2 cases of postoperative stiffness; all were treated nonoperatively.

CONCLUSION

In this study, we show that both biceps tenodesis and SLAP repair can provide good to excellent results if performed in appropriately selected patients with isolated type II SLAP lesions.

Evaluation of Oxford instability shoulder score, Western Ontario shoulder instability index and Euroqol in patients with SLAP (superior labral anterior posterior) lesions or recurrent anterior dislocations of the shoulder

Background

Having an estimate of the measurement error of self-report questionnaires is important both for assessing follow-up results after treatment and when planning intervention studies. Specific questionnaires have been evaluated for patients with shoulder instability, but not in particular for patients with SLAP (superior labral anterior posterior) lesions or recurrent dislocations. The aim of this study was to evaluate the agreement, reliability, and validity of two commonly questionnaires developed for patients with shoulder instability and a generic questionnaire in patients with SLAP lesions or recurrent anterior shoulder dislocations.

Methods

Seventy-one patients were included, 33 had recurrent anterior dislocations and 38 had a SLAP lesion. The patients filled in the questionnaires twice at the same time of the day (± 2 hours) with a one week interval between administrations. We tested the Oxford Instability Shoulder Score (OISS) (range 12 to 60), the Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index (WOSI) (0 to 2100), and the EuroQol: EQ-5D (−0.5 to 1.0) and EQ-VAS (0 to 100). Hypotheses were defined to test validity.

Results

ICC ranged from 0.89 (95% CI 0.83 to 0.93) to 0.92 (0.87 to 0.95) for OISS, WOSI, and EQ-VAS and was 0.66 (0.50 to 0.77) for EQ-5D. The limits of agreement for the scores were: -7.8 to 8.4 for OISS; -339.9 to 344.8 for WOSI; -0.4 to 0.4 for EQ-5D; and −17.2 and 16.2 for EQ-VAS. All questionnaires reflect the construct that was measured. The correlation between WOSI and OISS was 0.73 and ranged from 0.49 to 0.54 between the shoulder questionnaires and the generic questionnaires. The divergent validity was acceptable, convergent validity failed, and known group validity was acceptable only for OISS.

Conclusion

Measurement errors and limitations in validity should be considered when change scores of OISS and WOSI are interpreted in patients with SLAP lesions or recurrent shoulder dislocations. EQ-5D is not recommended as a single outcome.