Demographic trends in arthroscopic and open biceps tenodesis across the United States

Greater Postoperative Biceps Tendon Migration Following Biceps Tenodesis Correlates with Lower Patient Reported Outcomes Scores

PURPOSE

To assess the relationship between tendon migration, as measured by radiostereometric analysis (RSA), and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) following biceps tenodesis (BT); to determine the likelihood of achieving clinically significant outcomes (CSOs) following BT; and to identify factors that impact CSO achievement.

METHODS

Patients undergoing arthroscopic suprapectoral or open subpectoral BT at a single, high-volume academic medical center were prospectively enrolled. A tantalum bead sutured to the tenodesis construct was utilized as a radio-opaque marker. Biceps tendon migration was measured on calibrated radiographs at 12 weeks postoperatively. PROMs (Constant-Murley score [Constant], Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation [SANE], and Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information Systemic-Upper Extremity [PROMIS-UE]) were collected preoperatively and at ≥2 years follow-up.

RESULTS

Of 115 patients enrolled, 94 (82%) patients were included (median age=52 years and BMI=31.4 kg/m2). At a mean follow-up of 2.9 years, median Constant, SANE, and PROMIS-UE were 33 (interquartile range [IQR]=26-35), 90 (IQR=80-99), and 47 (IQR=42-58), respectively. Median tantalum bead migration was 6.5 mm (IQR 1.8-13.8). There was a significant correlation between migration and Constant (r2 = 0.222, beta= -0.554, 95% CI -1.027- [-0.081], P=0.022), SANE (r2 = 0.238, beta= -0.198, 95% CI -0.337 - [-0.058], P=0.006) and PROMIS-UE (r2 = 0.233, beta= -0.406, 95% CI -0.707 - [-0.104], P=0.009). In univariable analysis, higher BMI was associated with achievement of substantial clinical benefit (SCB, unadj-OR=1.078, 95%CI 1.007-1.161, P=0.038). Greater bead migration was negatively associated with achievement of minimal clinically important difference (MCID, unadj-OR=0.969, 95% CI 0.943-0.993, P=0.014) and patient acceptable symptomatic state (PASS, unadj-OR 0.965, 95% CI 0.937-0.989, P=0.008) on all 3 instruments.

CONCLUSION

A 1 cm-increase in tenodesed biceps tendon migration was associated with a decrease in Constant, SANE, and PROMIS-UE of 6, 2, and 4 points, respectively, at a mean of 2.9 years after surgery. Most patients achieved clinically significant outcomes (CSOs) for these PROMs by latest follow-up, and greater biceps tendon construct migration was negatively associated with the likelihood of CSO achievement.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV, retrospective case series.

Evaluating clinical outcomes of two biceps tenodesis techniques: Loop 'N' Tack and subpectoral biceps tenodesis

Purpose

Biceps tenodesis is an effective surgical procedure that can address pathologies of the long head of the biceps tendon. The purpose of this study was to evaluate clinical outcomes following two different biceps tenodesis techniques: Loop 'N' Tack biceps tenodesis and subpectoral biceps tenodesis.

Hypothesis

Patients undergoing both the subpectoral biceps tenodesis and Loop 'N' Tack biceps tenodesis will have improvements in patient-reported outcomes.

Methods

Hundred and sixty five consecutive patients who underwent biceps tenodesis were retrospectively identified and contacted by phone to collect visual analog scale pain scores, University of California, Los Angeles shoulder scores, Simple Shoulder Test scores, Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation scores, and American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons scores. Range of motion, elbow flexion strength, and incidence of bicipital groove pain and Popeye deformity were recorded.

Results

One Hundred and forty five patients were included in the study (55 subpectoral, 90 Loop 'N' Tack). Patients in both groups reported high American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons, Simple Shoulder Test, University of California, Los Angeles, Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation shoulder function scores, low visual analog scale pain scores, and had a minimal risk of complications when measured one year postoperatively.

Conclusion

Loop 'N' Tack biceps tenodesis and subpectoral biceps tenodesis techniques are reliable and effective procedures that can reduce pain scores and restore shoulder function when patients require surgical intervention.

Arthroscopic suprapectoral biceps tenodesis provided earlier shoulder function restoration compared with open subpectoral biceps tenodesis during the recovery phase

BACKGROUND

This study compared the clinical outcomes of open subpectoral biceps tenodesis and arthroscopic suprapectoral biceps tenodesis for symptomatic biceps tenosynovitis. Although both techniques have pros and cons, no studies have compared clinical and functional outcomes during the recovery phase. Previous studies show that suprapectoral tenodesis has a higher probability of Popeye deformity and postoperative bicipital pain and stiffness, whereas subpectoral tenodesis has a higher risk of nerve complications and wound infections. This study aimed for clinical comparison between arthroscopic suprapectoral biceps tenodesis and open subpectoral biceps tenodesis.

METHODS

This study is a retrospective review of institutional records of patients with biceps tendinitis who underwent open or arthroscopic biceps tenodesis. Surgical indications included biceps tenosynovitis, biceps partial tear, and biceps pulley lesion. Patients with prior shoulder surgery, preoperative shoulder stiffness, or full-thickness tear of rotator cuff were excluded. Tenodesis was considered when the pain recurs within 3 months despite conservative treatment including at least 2 triamcinolone injections on the biceps tendon sheath. Visual analog scale (VAS) score for pain, presence of the night pain, American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) score, Constant score, and range of motion were assessed preoperatively at 3, 6, 12, and 24 months postoperatively and the last follow-up.

RESULTS

A total of 72 patients (33 with arthroscopic suprapectoral biceps tenodeses and 39 with open subpectoral biceps tenodeses) were included in analysis. At postoperative 6 months, lower VAS score (0.4 ± 0.8 vs. 1.7 ± 1.9, P < .001), and the presence of the night pain (2 [6%] vs. 14 [36%], P = .002), ASES score (89.6 ± 9.2 vs. 81.4 ± 14.6, P = .006), and Constant score (89.4 ± 5.6 vs. 82.0 ± 12.5, P = .003) compared with the subpectoral group. The mean number of postoperative steroid injections for pain control in the subpectoral group (0.51 ± 0.80) was significantly higher than that in the suprapectoral group (0.18 ± 0.40) (P = .031). However, postoperative clinical outcomes were restored similar between the 2 groups at 12 months and the last follow-up.

DISCUSSION

Arthroscopic suprapectoral biceps tenodesis performed statistically better than the subpectoral biceps tenodesis for the VAS, ASES, night pain, and Constant score at postoperative 6 months. However, only night pain and the Constant score showed differences that exceeded minimum clinically important difference during the recovery phase. At postoperative 12 and 24 months, biceps tenodesis provided satisfactory clinical outcomes and pain relief regardless of the fixation technique and suture anchor location.

An Expedited Sling Immobilization Protocol After Isolated Biceps Tenodesis Results in Clinical and Patient-Reported Postoperative Outcomes Equivalent to a Standard Rehabilitation Protocol

Purpose

To characterize clinical and patient-reported outcomes for patients after isolated biceps tenodesis (BT) who underwent either standard or expedited sling immobilization protocols following surgery.

Methods

This retrospective cohort study compared patients who were assigned to use a sling for either 4 to 6 weeks (standard) or 0 to 2 weeks (expedited) following an isolated BT. Primary endpoint included rate of re-rupture, surgical revision, loss of fixation, and Popeye deformity. Secondary endpoints included shoulder range of motion (ROM) as well as pre- and postoperative patient-reported outcomes (PROs) of pain and function. Missing data were managed via multiple imputation with chained equations. Complication prevalence 95% confidence intervals were calculated using the Clopper Pearson method and a series of hierarchical mixed effects linear regressions were performed to assess differences between sling interventions in PROs and ROM.

Results

The average age of the standard cohort (n = 66) was 49 years (±14 years), and the average age of the expedited cohort (n = 69) was 47 years (±14 years). The expedited and standardized cohorts demonstrated 0.4 and 0.3 complications per 10,000 exposure days, respectively, with no significant difference between groups (1.4 [95% confidence interval 0.2-10.0], P = .727). There was no demonstrated difference in forward flexion, abduction, or external ROM. The expedited group had less improvement in visual analog scale for pain scores that was not clinically significant and there were no differences in PROs of function.

Conclusions

No statistically significant difference in the rate of re-rupture, surgical revision, loss of fixation, or Popeye deformity was noted between protocols after isolated BT. Furthermore, there were no clinically significant differences in ROM or PROs identified between protocols after isolated BT. This study suggests that patients who have undergone isolated BT may safely discontinue sling use within 2 weeks after surgery.

Level of Evidence

Level III, retrospective comparative study.

Subpectoral Biceps Tenodesis Using an All-Suture Knotless Anchor

The long head of the biceps tendon is a common pain generator in the anterior shoulder and is concomitantly seen with other shoulder pathology including subacromial impingement, as well as rotator cuff and labral tears. This Technical Note describes a mini-open onlay biceps tenodesis technique using all-suture knotless anchor fixation. This technique is easily reproducible, is efficient, and offers the unique benefits of providing a consistent length-tension relation and mitigating the risk of peri-implant reaction and fracture without sacrificing strength of fixation.

Depressive and Anxiety Disorders Increase Risk for Recurrent Anterior Shoulder Pain Following Arthroscopic Suprapectoral Biceps Tenodesis

Purpose

To evaluate factors associated with postoperative anterior shoulder pain following arthroscopic suprapectoral biceps tenodesis (ABT) and to determine the clinical impact of postoperative anterior shoulder pain.

Methods

A retrospective study of patients that underwent ABT between 2016 and 2020 was conducted. Groups were categorized by the presence (ASP+) or absence (ASP-) of postoperative anterior shoulder pain. Patient-reported outcomes (American Shoulder and Elbow score [ASES], visual analog scale [VAS] for pain, subjective shoulder value [SSV]), strength, range of motion, and complication rates were analyzed. Differences between continuous and categorical variables were tested with two-sample t-tests and chi-squared or Fisher's exact tests, respectively. Variables collected at different postoperative timepoints were analyzed using mixed models with post hoc comparisons when significant interactions were detected.

Results

A total of 461 (47 ASP+, 414 ASP-) patients were included. A statistically significant lower mean age was observed in the ASP+ group (P < .001). A statistically significant higher prevalence of major depressive disorder (MDD) (P = .03) or any anxiety disorder (P = .002) was observed in the ASP+ group. Prescription medication with psychotropic medications (P = .01) was significantly more prevalent in the ASP+ group. No significant differences were observed in the proportion of individuals reaching the minimal clinical important difference (MCID) for ASES, VAS, or SSV between groups.

Conclusions

A pre-existing diagnosis of major depressive disorder or any anxiety disorder, as well as the use of psychotropic medications was associated with postoperative anterior shoulder pain following ABT. Other factors associated with anterior shoulder pain included younger age, participation in physical therapy before surgery, and lower rate of concomitant rotator cuff repair or subacromial decompression. Although the proportion of individuals reaching MCID did not differ between groups, the presence of anterior shoulder pain after ABT resulted in prolonged recovery, inferior PROs, and a higher incidence of repeat surgical procedures. The decision to perform ABT in patients diagnosed with MDD or anxiety should be carefully considered, given the correlation to postoperative anterior shoulder pain and inferior outcomes.

Level of Evidence

Level III, retrospective case-control study.

The role of the long head of the biceps tendon in posterior shoulder stabilization during forward flexion

BACKGROUND

The role of the long head of the biceps tendon (LHBT) in glenohumeral stability is not fully understood. Most objects are lifted in the sagittal plane with forward flexion, which stresses the posterior aspect of the unconstrained glenohumeral joint. Determining the mechanism by which the shoulder maintains stability with functional motions is important to understanding the pathoanatomy of degenerative shoulders. Our hypothesis was that the LHBT resists posterior translation of the humeral head (HH) during forward flexion by tensioning the posterior capsuloligamentous complex.

METHODS

Ten fresh-frozen cadaveric shoulders were tested using an established shoulder simulator that loads the LHBT, rotator cuff, and deltoid tendons through a system of pulleys. A motion tracking system recorded glenohumeral translations with an accuracy of ±0.2 mm. In each subject, the scapula was fixed and the humerus was tested in 6 positions: 30° and 60° of glenohumeral forward flexion at (1) maximum internal rotation (IR), (2) neutral rotation, and (3) maximum external rotation (ER). The deltoid was loaded with 100 N, and the infraspinatus and subscapularis were loaded with 22 N each. The difference in glenohumeral translation was calculated at each position comparing the LHBT loaded with 45 N or unloaded.

RESULTS

At 30° of glenohumeral forward flexion, unloading the LHBT increased HH posterior translation by 2.5 mm (±0.9 mm; P < .001), 1.7 mm (±1.0 mm; P < .001), and 1.0 mm (±0.9 mm; P = .01) at maximum ER, neutral rotation, and maximum IR, respectively. At 60° of glenohumeral forward flexion, unloading the LHBT increased HH posterior translation by 2.8 mm (±1.2 mm; P < .001), 2.4 mm (±1.6 mm; P < .001), and 1.7 mm (±1.4 mm; P < .001) at maximum ER, neutral rotation, and maximum IR, respectively.

CONCLUSION

LHBT loading resists posterior translation of the HH during forward flexion. These data support the role of the LHBT as a posterior stabilizer of the shoulder, specifically when a person is carrying objects in front of them. Further work is needed to determine if unloading the LHBT, as is done with biceps tenotomy or tenodesis, may eventually lead to posterior labral pathology, or to the posterior glenoid wear commonly seen with osteoarthritis.

"Triple-Fix" Arthroscopic Biceps Tenodesis: Indications and Technique

Pathology of the long head of the bicep tendon is a common cause of anterior shoulder pain and frequently is treated surgically using either tenodesis or tenotomy. Tenodesis often is the preferred technique for younger, more active patients and laborers, especially when cosmesis and preservation of function are clinical priorities. However, the security of the tenodesis varies with fixation methods and techniques, and failure of the tenodesis can have both cosmetic and symptomatic consequences. Traditional arthroscopic tenodesis also can be technically challenging, as it usually requires extra-articular identification of the bicep tendon within the bicipital groove. The arthroscopic surgical technique described is an approach that has been routinely employed by the senior author for approximately 8 years that allows for accurate and reproducible exposure of the biceps tendon within the bicipital groove along with secure, anatomic tenodesis of the long head of the bicep tendon.

How Long Does It Take to Achieve Clinically Significant Outcomes After Isolated Biceps Tenodesis?

Background:

Clinically significant outcomes (CSOs) connect patient-reported outcome measures data to patient-perceived benefit. Although investigators have established threshold values for various CSOs, the timeline to achieve these outcomes after isolated biceps tenodesis (BT) has yet to be defined.

Purpose:

To define the time-dependent nature of minimal clinically important difference (MCID), substantial clinical benefit (SCB), and Patient Acceptable Symptom State (PASS) achievement after isolated BT.

Study Design:

Case series; Level of evidence, 4.

Methods:

The American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score (ASES), the Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation, and the Constant-Murley score (CMS) were administered preoperatively and at 6 and 12 months postoperatively to patients undergoing isolated BT between 2014 and 2018 at our institution. Cumulative probabilities for achieving MCID, SCB, and PASS were calculated using Kaplan-Meier survival analysis. Weibull parametric regression evaluated the hazard ratios (HRs) of achieving earlier MCID, SCB, and PASS.

Results:

Overall cohort (N = 190) achievement rates ranged between 77.8% and 83.2% for MCID, between 42.2% and 80.2% for SCB, and between 59.7% and 62.9% for PASS. Median achievement time was 5.3 to 6.1 months for MCID, 5.9 to 6.4 months for SCB, and 6.07 to 6.1 months for PASS. Multivariate Weibull parametric regression identified older age, male sex, higher body mass index, preoperative thyroid disease, smoking history, and higher preoperative CMS as predictors of delayed CSO achievement (HR, 1.01-6.41), whereas normal tendon on arthroscopy, defined as absence of tenosynovitis or tendon tear on arthroscopy, predicted earlier CSO achievement (HR, 0.19-0.46). Location of tenodesis and worker compensation status did not significantly predict the time to achieve CSOs on multivariate analysis.

Conclusion:

After isolated BT, patients can expect to attain CSO by 13 months postoperatively, with most patients achieving this between 5 and 8 months. Patients tend to take longer to achieve PASS than MCID and SCB.

Clinical outcome comparison of suprapectoral and subpectoral tenodesis of the long head of the biceps with concomitant rotator cuff repair: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Simultaneous repairs of rotator cuff and biceps tenodesis can be managed by tenodesis of long head of biceps tendon to a subpectoral or suprapectoral area. This review investigated long head of biceps tendon tenodesis with concomitant rotator cuff repair and evaluated the clinical outcomes and incidences of complications based on tenodesis location.

METHODS

Medline, Cochrane, and Embase databases were searched for published, randomized or nonrandomized controlled studies and prospective or retrospective case series with the phrases "suprapectoral," "subpectoral," "tenodesis," and "long head of biceps tendon". Those with a clinical evidence Level IV or higher were included. Non-English manuscripts, review articles, commentaries, letters, case reports, and sole long head of biceps tendon tenodesis articles were excluded.

RESULTS

From 481 studies, 13 were chosen. In total, 1194 subpectoral and 2520 suprapectoral tenodesis cases were investigated. Postoperative Constant-Murley and American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons mean scores showed similar good results. In terms of complication incidences, while transient nerve injuries were more commonly seen in patients with subpectoral tenodesis, persistent bicipital pain and Popeye deformity are mostly seen in patients with suprapectoral tenodesis.

DISCUSSION

Biceps tenodesis to suprapectoral or subpectoral area with concomitant rotator cuff repair demonstrated similar outcomes. Popeye deformity and persistent bicipital pain were higher in suprapectoral area and transient neuropraxia was found to be higher in subpectoral area.Level of evidence: IV.

Current Controversies and Decision-Making in the Management of Biceps Pathologies

»

Biceps tendon pathologies include a spectrum of injuries that range from mild tendinosis to complete tendon rupture.

»

Tendinosis, the most common pathology, occurs more frequently with age and is likely related to chronic degeneration. On the other side of the spectrum of severity lies a rupture of the long head of the biceps tendon (LHBT), which may be accompanied by injury to the glenoid labrum.

»

Superior labral anterior-posterior (SLAP) tears are frequently associated with biceps pathology. Surgical management for injuries of the bicipital-labral complex includes biceps tenodesis or tenotomy and SLAP repair. A consensus as to which of these procedures is the optimal choice has not been reached, and management may ultimately depend on patient-specific characteristics.

»

Due to the relatively low incidence of distal biceps tendon rupture, agreement on the optimal management strategy has not been reached. Surgical repair, or reconstruction in the case of a chronic rupture, is often chosen. However, nonoperative management has also been utilized in older, less-active patients.

Clinical Outcomes of Revision Biceps Tenodesis for Failed Long Head of Biceps Surgery: A Systematic Review

PURPOSE

We summarize the indications, assess the modes of failure, and analyze the clinical and functional outcomes of revision biceps tenodesis after failed primary surgical treatment of long head of biceps (LHB) pathology.

METHODS

A computerized search of PubMed, EMBASE, and CINAHL databases and manual screening of selected article reference lists was performed in September 2020. Randomized controlled trial, cohort, case-control, and case series studies reporting clinical outcomes of revision biceps tenodesis following failed LHB surgery were eligible. Patient demographics, indications for revision, intraoperative findings, surgical techniques, and patient-reported outcomes were recorded. Functional assessment and pain scores were assessed and summarized as forest plots with means and 95% confidence intervals.

RESULTS

Five of 465 identified studies met inclusion criteria, encompassing 70 revision biceps tenodesis procedures with mean follow-up of 2.4-6.4 years. The failed index procedure was biceps tenodesis in 62 patients and tenotomy in 8 patients. The most common indications for revision were pain or cramping and rerupture, cited by 4 and 3 articles, respectively. After failed conservative treatment, open subpectoral revision tenodesis was performed with concomitant arthroscopic debridement in 65 of 70 cases. Common intraoperative findings at time of revision were adhesions or scarring (39.0-83.0%), fixation failure (8.7-75.0%), and biceps rupture (17.4-80.0%). Revision tenodesis patients reported good to excellent functional outcomes with improvements in Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation, American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Shoulder, and visual analog scale pain scores, and satisfaction ranged from 88.0 to 100%. All studies demonstrated moderate quality of evidence and risk of bias when critically appraised.

CONCLUSION

This systematic review of 5 moderate risk of bias studies demonstrated that the most common reasons for revision biceps tenodesis were pain or cramping and rerupture. Open subpectoral revision tenodesis with concomitant arthroscopic debridement provided improvements in functional scores with high patient satisfaction at mid-term follow up.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV, Systematic Review of level III and IV investigations.

The rate and reporting of fracture after biceps tenodesis: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this systematic review was to (1) define the cumulative humerus fracture rate after BT and (2) compare how often fracture rate was reported compared to other complications.

METHODS

A systematic review was performed using the PRISMA guidelines.

RESULTS

39 studies reported complications and 30 reported no complications. Of the 39 studies that reported complications, 5 studies reported fracture after BT (n = 669, cumulative incidence of 0.53%). The overall non-fracture complication rate was 12.9%.

DISCUSSION

Due to the relatively high incidence of fracture, surgeons should ensure that this complication is disclosed to patients undergoing BT.

Impact of shoulder, elbow and forearm position on biceps tendon excursion: A cadaveric study

PURPOSE

This experimental study investigated the long head biceps tendon (LHBT) excursion that occurs at various positions of the upper limb during tendon stabilizing procedures. We hypothesized that shoulder abduction, elbow extension and forearm pronation would maximize the excursion of the LHBT and potential impacts on tendon stabilization.

MATERIALS & METHODS

Forequarter specimens from 12 fresh frozen cadavers were used in this study. The study was performed at 0° and 30° of shoulder abduction. Elbow position was either 90° of flexion or full extension with the forearm either in full pronation or supination. A total of 14 combinations of positions were studied. A load of 55 N was applied to the distal biceps. The excursion of the proximal part of LHBT was measured for each of the different positions.

RESULTS

At a shoulder position of 30° of flexion, shoulder abduction of 30° created significantly greater excursion than 0° of shoulder abduction (p < 0.001). Both full extension of the elbow and full pronation of the forearm also showed significant excursion of the tendon when compared to supination (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

The position of the shoulder, elbow and forearm has a significant effect on biceps excursion. Thirty degrees of shoulder abduction and 30° of forward flexion with the elbow in full extension and the forearm in full pronation maximizes excursion.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Information about the excursion of the LHBT affected by the position of the upper limb is useful for any biceps tendon stabilizing procedure. During an operation, the position of the upper limb should be monitored in order to maintain a proper anatomic length-tension relationship.

Early Versus Delayed Active Range of Motion After Open Subpectoral Biceps Tenodesis

Background

Little is known regarding the effect of early active elbow range of motion (ROM) protocols on failure rates and outcomes after open subpectoral biceps tenodesis.

Hypothesis

We hypothesized that patients managed using an early active ROM protocol after open subpectoral biceps tenodesis would demonstrate similar failure rates and functional outcomes compared to patients managed using a traditional delayed active ROM protocol.

Study Design

Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3.

Methods

We evaluated 63 patients who underwent open subpectoral biceps tenodesis with unicortical suture button fixation. Based on surgeon preference, 22 patients were managed using an early active motion protocol consisting of no restrictions on elbow flexion or forearm supination, while 41 patients were managed using a delayed motion protocol postoperatively. Primary outcome measures included failure of biceps tenodesis and American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) and Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (SANE) scores. Secondary outcomes included shoulder and elbow ROM at 6 months postoperatively.

Results

The mean follow-up for the 63 patients was 24.2 months postoperatively. One patient (2.4%) in the delayed active motion cohort and no patients in the early active motion cohort experienced failure. Final outcome scores as well as 6-month shoulder and elbow ROM indicated excellent functional outcomes, with no significant difference between motion cohorts. The median postoperative ASES scores were 97.99 in the early active motion cohort (mean ± standard deviation [SD], 95.49 ± 7.68) and 95.42 in the delayed motion cohort (mean ± SD, 90.93 ± 16.08), while median postoperative SANE scores were 96 in the early motion cohort (mean ± SD, 94.23 ± 6.68) and 95 in the delayed motion cohort (mean ± SD, 88.39 ± 17.98). Subgroup analysis demonstrated no significant difference in outcome scores based on the performance of concomitant rotator cuff repair or hand dominance.

Conclusion

Early active ROM after open subpectoral biceps tenodesis with unicortical suture button fixation resulted in low failure rates and excellent clinical outcomes, comparable to the results of patients managed using delayed active ROM protocols. This suggests that patients undergoing open subpectoral biceps tenodesis may be managed using either early or delayed active motion protocols without compromising functional outcome.

Short-Term Clinical and Return-to-Work Outcomes After Arthroscopic Suprapectoral Onlay Biceps Tenodesis With a Single Suture Anchor

Purpose

To describe short-term outcomes of arthroscopic suprapectoral onlay biceps tenodesis using a single all-suture anchor with respect to validated outcome measures, return to work, objective strength and motion data, and biceps-specific testing.

Methods

This study describes a consecutive series of patients undergoing arthroscopic suprapectoral onlay biceps tenodesis performed by a single surgeon from January to December 2017. Patients were evaluated preoperatively and postoperatively with the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons questionnaire, visual analog scale, Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation, Veterans RAND 12-Item Health Survey, and 12-Item Short Form survey, and return-to-work survey. Postoperative strength, range of motion, and biceps-specific testing was also performed.

Results

This study included 50 patients (26 men and 24 women), with an average age (± standard deviation) of 50.1 ± 10.9 years and average final follow-up of 21.3 ± 8.5 months. Among employed patients, 32 (71.1%) returned to work at an average of 4.6 ± 2.3 months. Light-duty workers returned to work at a significantly greater rate (85.7% vs 33.3%, P = .016) and in less time (2.6 ± 2.0 months vs 6.8 ± 4.2 months) than heavy-duty workers. No differences were found between operative and nonoperative sides in the biceps apex distance (P = .636) or range of motion in elbow flexion and extension (P > .9 for both), supination (P = .192), or pronation (P = .343) postoperatively. Strength in elbow flexion (P = .002), as well as shoulder forward elevation (P < .001) and external rotation (P < .001), increased postoperatively. Significant patient-reported improvements were noted in the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score, visual analog scale pain score, Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation score, Constant-Murley score, and Veterans RAND 12-Item Health Survey and 12-Item Short Form physical component scores (P ≤ .001 for all). A postoperative Popeye deformity developed in 5 patients (10%).

Conclusions

Arthroscopic suprapectoral onlay biceps tenodesis with a single all-suture anchor can provide overall excellent clinical outcomes regarding strength, motion, and validated patient-reported outcome questionnaires. Return to occupational activities may be less predictable and more prolonged for heavy laborers. A small number of patients may experience cosmetic deformity postoperatively.

Level of Evidence

Level IV, therapeutic case series.

Predicting Patient Satisfaction With Maximal Outcome Improvement After Biceps Tenodesis

The goal of this study was to determine the threshold for achieving maximal outcome improvement (MOI) on the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES), Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (SANE), and Constant-Murley (CM) questionnaires that predict satisfaction after isolated biceps tenodesis without concomitant rotator cuff repair. A retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data was performed for patients undergoing isolated biceps tenodesis from 2014 to 2017 at a single institution with minimum 6-month follow-up. Receiver operating characteristic curve analysis was used to determine thresholds for MOI for the ASES, SANE, and CM questionnaires. Stepwise multivariate logistical regression analysis was performed to identify predictors for achieving the threshold for MOI. A total of 123 patients were included in the final analysis. Receiver operating characteristic analysis determined that achieving 43.1%, 62.1%, and 61.4% MOI was the threshold for satisfaction for the ASES, SANE, and CM questionnaires, respectively. Regression analysis showed that concomitant superior labrum anterior-posterior (SLAP) repair was predictive of achieving MOI on the ASES and SANE questionnaires, whereas partial rotator cuff tear was predictive of achieving MOI on the CM questionnaire (P<.05 for both). Further, workers' compensation status, diabetes, history of ipsilateral shoulder surgery, and hypertension were negative predictors of achieving MOI on the SANE and CM questionnaires (P<.05 for all). Achieving MOI of 43.1%, 62.1%, and 61.4% is the threshold for satisfaction after biceps tenodesis for the ASES, SANE, and CM questionnaires, respectively. Concomitant SLAP repair was positively predictive of achieving MOI, whereas workers' compensation status, diabetes, history of ipsilateral shoulder surgery, and hypertension were negative predictors. [Orthopedics. 2021;44(3):e359-e366.].

Cost comparison of arthroscopic rotator cuff repair with arthroscopic vs. open biceps tenodesis

PURPOSE

To use a nationwide database to determine differences in cost between patients who underwent arthroscopic rotator cuff tear with open vs. arthroscopic biceps tenodesis (BT).

METHODS

The 2014 State Ambulatory Surgical and Services Databases from 6 US states was utilized. All cases with CPT codes 29827 (arthroscopic rotator cuff repair [RCR]) and either 23430 (tenodesis of long tendon of biceps) or 29828 (arthroscopic BT) were selected. Cases that included both 23430 and 29828 were excluded, as were those missing demographic data. Generalized linear models were used to model costs based on the surgical and patient variables that were significant in the initial bivariate analysis (P < .05).

RESULTS

A total of 3635 RCR and BT cases were identified. There were 2847 (78.3%) with arthroscopic BT and 788 (21.7%) with open BT. Patients undergoing arthroscopic BT were 3.1 years older than patients undergoing open BT (P < .001). For arthroscopic BT, 39.2% of the cases were women compared with 22.6% of the open cases (P < .001). For operative variables, arthroscopic BT required 9 fewer minutes in the OR than open cases (P = .002). Concomitant distal clavicle resection was performed in 35.5% of arthroscopic BT cases compared with 29.8% of open cases (P = .004). While controlling for other significant factors, open BT was associated with $5542 lower costs than arthroscopic BT in the setting of RCR (P < .001). In either case, concomitant subacromial decompression added $10,669 (P < .001), and distal clavicle resection added $3210 (P < .001). High-volume surgical facilities were associated with $4107 lower costs (P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

In a large series of patients undergoing arthroscopic RCR with open vs. arthroscopic BT, open BT was associated with $5542 lower costs than arthroscopic. Given that both techniques have been shown to be similarly effective in long-term follow-up, surgeons should be aware of opportunities for cost saving, particularly with the advent of bundled surgical reimbursements.

Influence of workers' compensation status on postoperative outcomes in patients following biceps tenodesis: a matched-pair cohort analysis

BACKGROUND AND HYPOTHESIS

Although the literature on the association of workers' compensation (WC) status with negative outcomes after orthopedic surgery is extensive, there is a paucity of evidence on outcomes in WC recipients undergoing biceps tenodesis. We hypothesized that WC patients would report significantly worse outcomes postoperatively on patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs).

METHODS

Functional and health-related quality-of-life PROMs and a visual analog scale score for pain were administered preoperatively and at 12 months postoperatively to consecutive patients undergoing isolated biceps tenodesis between 2014 and 2018 at our institution. Thirty-eight WC patients were matched 1:2 to non-WC patients by age, body mass index, and operative limb. The minimal clinically important difference, substantial clinical benefit, and patient acceptable symptom state were calculated for all patients via anchor- and distribution-based methods. Rates of achievement and the likelihood of achievement were determined.

RESULTS

All patients showed significant improvements in all outcome measures (P < .001). WC patients reported inferior postoperative scores on all PROMs examined. WC status significantly predicted a reduced likelihood of achieving substantial clinical benefit for the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score (odds ratio [OR], 0.38; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.17-0.81; P = .01) and the patient acceptable symptom state (OR, 0.28; 95% CI, 0.12-0.65; P = .003) for the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score, Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation score (OR, 0.24; 95% CI, 0.10-0.61; P = .003), Constant-Murley Subjective Assessment (OR, 0.25; 95% CI, 0.08-0.77; P = .016), and visual analog scale pain score (OR, 0.27; 95% CI, 0.16-0.47; P < .001).

CONCLUSION

WC patients reported inferior scores on all postoperative PROMs and demonstrated lower odds of achieving substantial benefit and satisfaction regarding improvements in both function and pain compared with non-WC patients.

Influence of mental health on postoperative outcomes in patients following biceps tenodesis

PURPOSE

To evaluate the relationship between preoperative mental health measured by the Short-Form 12 health survey mental component score and outcomes after isolated biceps tenodesis.

METHODS

The American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons form (ASES), Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (SANE), Constant-Murley score (CMS), and visual analog scale (VAS) for pain were administered preoperatively and at 6 and 12 months postoperatively to consecutive patients undergoing isolated biceps tenodesis between 2014 and 2018. Minimal clinically important difference, substantial clinical benefit (SCB), patient-acceptable symptom state (PASS), and rates of achievement were calculated. Patients were stratified by mental health status based on preoperative scores on the Short-Form 12 health survey mental component score. Multivariate logistic regression was performed to evaluate preoperative mental health status on achievement of minimal clinically important difference, SCB, and PASS.

RESULTS

Patients demonstrated significant improvements in all outcome measures (P < .001). Patients with depression reported inferior postoperative scores on all patient-reported outcome measures. Low preoperative mental health score significantly predicted reduced likelihood to achieve SCB (odds ratio [OR]: 0.38, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.17-0.81, P = .01) and PASS (OR: 0.28, 95% CI: 0.12-0.65, P = .003) on the ASES form, SANE (OR: 0.24, 95% CI: 0.10-0.61, P = .003), CMS (OR: 0.25, 95% CI: 0.08-0.77, P = .016), and VAS pain (OR: 0.01, 95% CI: 0.00-0.31, P = .008).

CONCLUSION

Patients with depression reported inferior scores on all postoperative patient-reported outcome measures and demonstrated lower odds of achieving the SCB and PASS on the ASES form and PASS on the SANE, CMS, and VAS pain, compared with nondepressed patients.

Intra-articular arthroscopic biceps tenodesis with interference screw: clinical and isokinetic evaluation

Background

Although biceps tenodesis has been widely used to treat its pathologies, few studies looked at the objective evaluation of elbow strength after this procedure. The purpose of this study is to clinically evaluate patients submitted to long head of the biceps (LHB) tenodesis with interference screws through an intra-articular approach and analyze the results of an isokinetic test to measure elbow flexion and forearm supination strengths.

Methods

Patients who had biceps tenodesis were included in the study if they had a minimum follow-up of 24 months. Patients were excluded if they had concomitant irreparable cuff tears or previous or current contralateral shoulder pain or weakness. Postoperative evaluation was based on University of California-Los Angeles (UCLA) shoulder score and on measurements of elbow flexion and supination strength, using an isokinetic dynamometer. Tests were conducted in both arms, with velocity set at 60º/s with 5 concentric-concentric repetitions.

Results

Thirty-three patients were included and the most common concomitant diagnosis were rotator cuff tear (69%) and superior labrum anterior to posterior (SLAP) lesions (28%). The average UCLA score improved from 15.1 preoperatively to 31.9 in the final follow-up (P < .001). Isokinetic tests showed no difference in peak torque between the upper limbs. One patient had residual pain in the biceps groove. None of the patients had Popeye deformity. UCLA score and follow-up length did not demonstrate correlation with peak torque.

Conclusion

Arthroscopic proximal biceps tenodesis with interference screw, close to the articular margin, yielded good clinical results. Isokinetic tests revealed no difference to the contralateral side in peak torque for both supination and elbow flexion.

Effect of biceps tenodesis on speed of recovery after arthroscopic rotator cuff repair

Background

Concomitant biceps tendon pathology is often present in patients undergoing rotator cuff repair (RCR). Management of biceps pathology has been reported to influence outcomes of RCR; however, the impact on the pace of recovery remains unclear. The purpose of this study was to analyze the effects of simultaneous RCR with biceps tenodesis (RCR-BT) on time to achieve maximum improvement and recovery speed for pain and function.

Methods

A retrospective review of 535 patients who underwent primary RCR for full-thickness tears. Patients treated with simultaneous RCR-BT were compared with RCR-only. Outcome measures and motion were recorded at preoperative routine postoperative intervals. Plateau in maximal improvement and recovery speed were analyzed for both pain and functional recovery.

Results

Baseline American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Standardized Shoulder Assessment Form (ASES) function was significantly lower for the RCR-BT cohort (20.5) compared with RCR-only (23.9; P = .008). For visual analog scale (VAS) pain and measured motion, the plateau in maximal improvement occurred at 6 months for RCR-BT compared with 12 months for the RCR-only group. The remainder of the patient-reported outcome measures took 12 months to achieve a plateau in maximal improvement. At 3 months, 79% of improvement in pain and 42%-49% of functional improvement was achieved in the RCR-BT cohort. Similarly, at 3 months, the RCR-only cohort achieved 73% of pain improvement and 36%-57% of functional improvement at 3 months.

Conclusion

Patients requiring RCR with simultaneous biceps tenodesis have lower baseline ASES function and earlier postoperative plateaus in pain relief and motion improvement following surgery. Nonetheless, the speed of recovery was not influenced by the biceps tenodesis.

Trends in Open and Arthroscopic Long Head of Biceps Tenodesis

BACKGROUND

In young and active patients, long head of biceps (LHB) tenodesis has become a common procedure for managing LHB pathology, but it remains unclear whether it is performed in isolation or along with other shoulder procedures and whether open and arthroscopic techniques produce different complications.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES

We sought to determine and compare open and arthroscopic LHB tenodesis in terms of (a) trends in overall use, (b) trends in use in isolation and in association with rotator cuff repair (RCR) and superior labral tear from anterior-to-posterior (SLAP) debridement/repair, and (c) the rates of post-operative complications.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective analysis of data from an insurance database to identify LHB tenodesis procedures performed from 2011 to 2014. The overall annual rates of open and arthroscopic LHB tenodesis were determined and then stratified according to concurrent RCR and SLAP repair/debridement. A multivariate logistic regression analysis that controlled for patient demographics (age, sex, comorbidity) was performed.

RESULTS

Overall, 8547 patients underwent LHB tenodesis, of which 43.5% were open and 56.5% were arthroscopic procedures. There was a significant increase in the utilization of LHB tenodesis from 2011 to 2014. In isolation, open LHB tenodesis was the more common technique overall and by year. Arthroscopic LHB tenodesis was the most common tenodesis technique performed in conjunction with RCR and SLAP repair/debridement. The overall complication rate was 2.9%; only wound dehiscence demonstrated a difference between techniques.

CONCLUSIONS

The rates of open and arthroscopic LHB tenodesis procedures increased significantly from 2011 to 2014, with open techniques more common when LHB tenodesis is performed in isolation and arthroscopic techniques more common when performed as a concomitant procedure. Our use of a population database did not allow us to evaluate biomechanical or cost-related phenomena, and future research should examine these and other relevant differences between these two LHB tenodesis techniques.

Management of Failed Proximal Biceps Surgery: Clinical Outcomes After Revision to Subpectoral Biceps Tenodesis

BACKGROUND

The preferred surgical technique to manage biceps-superior labral pathology is often debated, and rates of revision and persistence of pain vary widely according to surgical technique and patient characteristics.

PURPOSE

To evaluate the clinical and functional outcomes of patients undergoing revision subpectoral tenodesis after failed primary tenodesis or tenotomy of the long head of the biceps.

STUDY DESIGN

Case series; Level of evidence, 4.

METHODS

All patients undergoing revision biceps management by the senior surgeon between 2006 and 2016 and with a minimum 24-month follow-up were retrospectively identified. Patients being treated with concomitant rotator cuff repair or capsular release were excluded. Patient characteristic variables were recorded. Patient-reported outcomes including the functional score, Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (SANE), visual analog scale (VAS), Simple Shoulder Test (SST), and American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons were obtained, and range of motion, strength, and complications were quantified.

RESULTS

In total, 25 patients with revision biceps tenodesis were identified at a mean follow-up of 76.5 ± 31.5 months. The average age was 44.4 ± 14.3 years, and the surgical indications included failure of index suprapectoral biceps tenodesis (56%), subpectoral biceps tenodesis (36%), and patient dissatisfaction after tenotomy (8%). There was a significant improvement in the VAS score (P < .001), SANE (P = .001), SST (P = .035), functional score (P < .001), and forward elevation (P = .028), whereas postoperative strength (P = .440), abduction (P = .100), and external rotation (P = .745) improvement failed to achieve statistical significance after revision surgery. There was no difference in postoperative outcome measures between modes of failures, concomitant procedures, and sex. Twenty-two (88%) patients reported high satisfaction and stated they would have this revision surgery again. The overall complication rate was 48%, with half of these reporting pain of >3 on a scale of 10 and 4% of patients requiring additional surgeries.

CONCLUSION

The current study demonstrates high patient satisfaction (88%) and significant improvement in functional outcomes with revision biceps tenodesis, a mini-open subpectoral technique, after previous failed tenodesis or tenotomy. Although this may be an effective strategy to address failed prior biceps surgery, the potential complication of persistent pain must be emphasized. Patients should be counseled on the high complication rate (48%), with persistent pain being the most common complaint.

Editorial Commentary: Aim High or Go Low? Outcomes Are Equivalent for Arthroscopic Suprapectoral and Mini-open Subpectoral Biceps Tenodesis

The contemporary management of biceps-labral pathology has increasingly transitioned toward primary treatment of the long head of the biceps tendon, largely in response to more consistent outcomes relative to SLAP repair and so-called benign neglect. Accordingly, there has been renewed interest in evaluating relevant differences between varying operative techniques and constructs for biceps tenodesis, including an array of subacromial, intra-articular, suprapectoral, and subpectoral methods. Among these, arthroscopic suprapectoral tenodesis and mini-open subpectoral tenodesis remain in contention for "best in show," albeit with distinctly different merits and risks. Important considerations with either technique include restoration of the native length-tension relation, avoidance of perioperative complications, surgical-site morbidity, and technical ease. Dogma aside, surgeons facile with both techniques can confidently counsel their patients on the comparable short-term results after suprapectoral or subpectoral biceps tenodesis.

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

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.

Arthroscopic On-Lay Biceps Tenodesis: The Loop-Lock Technique

The biceps tendon is a common pain generator in the shoulder. Long head of the biceps tendon pathology occurs in a variety of different ways. There are several different treatment options available to address the long head of the biceps. With advances in arthroscopy, all-arthroscopic tenodesis is becoming a more popular choice to address biceps tendon pathology. We describe an all-arthroscopic technique, termed "the loop-lock," for performing a biceps tenodesis.

The Timing of Injections Prior to Arthroscopic Rotator Cuff Repair Impacts the Risk of Surgical Site Infection

BACKGROUND

Corticosteroid injections are a common treatment for rotator cuff tears. Because of concerns of infection, a surgical procedure is often delayed following injections. The purpose of this investigation was to determine if there is a temporal relationship between corticosteroid injections and the risk of surgical site infection after arthroscopic rotator cuff repair. We hypothesized that the incidence of surgical site infection is higher in patients who received a preoperative injection and this relationship exists in a temporal manner as those patients receiving an injection closer to the operative date have a higher risk of infection.

METHODS

The PearlDiver database was reviewed for patients undergoing arthroscopic rotator cuff repair from 2007 to 2016. Patients were stratified into 2 cohorts: those undergoing arthroscopic rotator cuff repair within 1 year of injection (n = 12,060), and those undergoing arthroscopic rotator cuff repair without prior injection (n = 48,763). Patients with preoperative injections were further stratified by the duration in months that the injection was performed prior to the surgical procedure. Surgical site infection within 6 months of the surgical procedure was recorded. Statistical analysis included chi-square and multivariate binomial logistic regression analyses to identify risk factors for surgical site infection. Results were considered significant at p < 0.05.

RESULTS

There was no significant difference in the incidence of surgical site infection in patients receiving a shoulder injection at 0.7% compared with the control cohort at 0.8% (odds ratio [OR], 0.9 [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.7 to 1.1]; p = 0.2). However, patients receiving an injection within 1 month prior to operative management had a significantly higher rate of surgical site infection overall at 1.3% compared with the control group at 0.8% (OR, 1.7 [95% CI, 1.0 to 2.9]; p = 0.04). On multivariate analysis, male sex (OR, 1.7 [95% CI, 1.4 to 1.9]; p = 0.001), obesity (OR, 1.4 [95% CI, 1.2 to 1.6]; p < 0.001), diabetes (OR, 1.3 [95% CI, 1.1 to 1.5]; p < 0.001), smoking status (OR, 1.7 [95% CI, 1.4 to 1.9], p < 0.001), and preoperative corticosteroid injections within 1 month of the surgical procedure (OR, 2.1 [95% CI, 1.5 to 2.7]; p < 0.001) were independent risk factors for development of a surgical site infection.

CONCLUSIONS

Injections within 1 month of arthroscopic rotator cuff repair significantly increases the risk of surgical site infection. However, there is no increased risk of infection if the surgical procedure is delayed by 1 month following an injection.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Predictive Factors and the Duration to Pre-Injury Work Status Following Biceps Tenodesis

PURPOSE

To determine when patients return to work after biceps tenodesis stratified by the preinjury level of work-intensity and to identify predictive measures of return to work.

METHODS

Patients undergoing biceps tenodesis between 2014 and 2017 were reviewed. Patients receiving concomitant rotator cuff repair or arthroplasty, revision biceps tenodesis, or unemployment before the procedure were excluded. Patient-acceptable symptom state (PASS), substantial clinical benefit, and minimal clinically important difference were calculated for the American Shoulder Elbow Society (ASES) score, subjective Constant-Murley score (CMS), and Single Assessment Numerical Evaluation (SANE) using the anchor-based and distribution-based approach. Preoperative outcome scores were analyzed to determine their predictive power of return to work using receiver operator curve area under the curve (AUC) analysis. Multivariate logistical analysis assessed predictive variables of return to work.

RESULTS

Seventy-nine percent of patients were able to return to work without permanent restrictions at an average of 5.4 ± 2.8 months after biceps tenodesis. Return to work status for sedentary, light, moderate, and heavy duties were 100%, 85%, 71%, and 69%, respectively. Return to work was associated with achieving PASS for the ASES and SANE questionnaires (P = .006, .003, respectively) but not for the CMS (P = .768). On multivariate analysis, there were no preoperative or intraoperative variables that were predictive of return to work in full capacity. The preoperative Short Form-12 mental component score (>59.4, AUC = 71.2%) was predictive of returning to work.

CONCLUSIONS

After biceps tenodesis, most patients were able to return to work at an average of 5.4 ± 2.8 months. Furthermore, there were no demographic or intraoperative variables that were predictive of return to work. Work intensity was not correlated with an increased duration of return to work. Achieving PASS on the ASES and SANE questionnaires was predictive of return to work.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV, case series.

Open Biceps Tenodesis Associated With Slightly Greater Rate of 30-Day Complications Than Arthroscopic: A Propensity-Matched Analysis

PURPOSE

To compare the early complication risk associated with open biceps tenodesis (OBT) and arthroscopic biceps tenodesis (ABT) and determine which preoperative factors may influence complication rate.

METHODS

The American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database was retrospectively queried from 2008 to 2016 for all procedures with CPT codes for ABT (29828) and OBT (23430). Patients were excluded if they received concomitant rotator cuff repair or shoulder arthroplasty. Patients undergoing OBT and ABT were matched by propensity scores based on age, body mass index, operative time, proportion of smokers, and proportion of concomitant subacromial decompression, distal clavicle excision, SLAP, and debridement. The incidence of adverse events in the 30-day postoperative period was compared.

RESULTS

A total of 8,032 patients met the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Prior to propensity match, patients receiving OBT and ABT, respectively, differed with respect to age (49.4 ± 13.8 vs 51.4 ± 13.2; P < .001), body mass index (29.6 ± 6.8 vs 29.9 ± 7.0; P = .029), and operative time (91.2 ± 51.3 vs 85.3 ± 43.4; P < .001). Following propensity match, 6,330 remained in the study (3,165 ABT and 3,165 OBT). OBT had significantly greater incidence of any adverse events (1.58% vs 0.95%; P = .032) and anemia requiring transfusion (0.35% vs 0%; P = .001). Multivariate analysis suggested that OBT (relative risk [RR] = 1.7, 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.1-2.7; P = .020), old age (RR = 1.6, 95% CI, 1.0-2.5), history of dyspnea (RR = 3.8, 95% CI, 1.8-7.7; P < .001), and congestive heart failure (RR = 5.5, 95% CI, 1.3-22.7; P = .019) were associated with developing a postoperative adverse event within 30 days of surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

Both procedures were found to have a low rate of complications, although OBT had a slightly greater (1.58% vs 0.95%) rate of 30-day complications than ABT. Early complication rate should not serve as impetus to direct surgical technique as number needed to treat is high, although ABT may be considered in more high-risk individuals.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, retrospective comparative database study.

Complications of biceps tenodesis based on location, fixation, and indication: a review of 1526 shoulders

BACKGROUND

Long head of the biceps tendon (LHBT) tenodesis is predominantly performed for 2 reasons: anterior shoulder pain (ASP) or structural reasons (partial tear, dislocation).

METHODS

Between 2006 and 2014, all cases of primary LHBT tenodesis performed at an integrated health care system were retrospectively reviewed. Complications were analyzed by tenodesis location (below or out of the groove [OOG] vs leaving tendon in the groove [ITG]), fixation method (soft tissue vs implant), and indication (preoperative ASP vs structural).

RESULTS

Among 1526 shoulders, persistent ASP did not differ by fixation method (11.0% for implant vs 12.8% for soft tissue, P = .550) or location (10.8% for OOG vs 12.9% for ITG, P = .472). Soft-tissue tenodesis cases had more frequent new-onset ASP (11.9% vs 2.6%, P < .001) and subjective weakness (8.50% vs 3.92%, P < .001) but less frequent revisions (0% vs 1.19%, P = .03) than implant tenodesis cases. No difference was found between ITG and OOG for persistent ASP (12.9% vs 10.8%, P = .550), new-onset ASP (6.5% vs 2.8%, P = .339), cramping (1.70% vs 2.31%, P = .737), deformity (4.72% vs 4.62%, P = .532), or subjective weakness (6.23% vs 4.32%, P = .334), but ITG cases had more revisions (1.51% vs 0.60%, P = .001). Among implant tenodesis cases, 1 shoulder (0.085%) sustained a fracture.

CONCLUSION

The overall complication rate of LHBT tenodesis was low. Of the shoulders, 10.8% to 12.9% continued to have ASP, regardless of whether the LHBT was left ITG. Soft-tissue tenodesis cases had higher rates of new-onset ASP and subjective weakness. No significant difference for tenodesis ITG or OOG was found in biceps-related complications.

Rates and Risk Factors for Revision Open and Arthroscopic Proximal Biceps Tenodesis

Background:

Biceps tenodesis may be performed for symptomatic tendinopathy or tearing of the long head of the biceps tendon. Biceps tenodesis is also commonly performed as an adjunctive procedure. However, the indications and prevalence of biceps tenodesis have expanded.

Purpose:

To establish the incidence and risk factors for revision biceps tenodesis.

Study Design:

Case-control study; Level of evidence, 2.

Methods:

The PearlDiver database of Humana patient data was queried for patients undergoing arthroscopic or open biceps tenodesis (Current Procedural Terminology [CPT] 29828 and CPT 23430, respectively) from 2008 through the first quarter of 2017. Patients without a CPT laterality modifier were excluded from analysis. Revision biceps tenodesis was defined as patients who underwent subsequent ipsilateral open or arthroscopic biceps tenodesis. The financial impact of revision biceps tenodesis was also calculated. Multivariate binomial logistic regression was performed to identify risk factors for revision biceps tenodesis, such as patient demographics as well as concomitant procedures and diagnoses. Odds ratios (ORs) and 95% CIs were calculated, and all statistical comparisons with P < .05 were considered significant.

Results:

There were 15,257 patients who underwent biceps tenodesis. Of these, 9274 patients (60.8%) underwent arthroscopic biceps tenodesis, while 5983 (39.2%) underwent open biceps tenodesis. A total of 171 patients (1.8%) and 111 patients (1.9%) required revision biceps tenodesis after arthroscopic and open biceps tenodesis, respectively (P = .5). Male sex (OR, 1.38 [95% CI, 1.04-1.85]; P = .02) was the only independent risk factor for revision biceps tenodesis after the index open biceps tenodesis. After arthroscopic biceps tenodesis, age >45 years (OR, 0.58 [95% CI, 0.39-0.89]; P = .01) and concomitant rotator cuff tear (OR, 0.58 [95% CI, 0.47-0.71]; P < .001) were independent protective factors for revision biceps tenodesis. The total cost of revision biceps tenodesis after open and arthroscopic biceps tenodesis was US$3427.95 and US$2174.33 per patient, respectively.

Conclusion:

There was no significant difference in the revision rate between arthroscopic and open biceps tenodesis. Risk factors for revision surgery included male sex for open biceps tenodesis, while age >45 years and rotator cuff tears were protective factors for arthroscopic biceps tenodesis.

Arthroscopic extra-articular suprapectoral biceps tenodesis with knotless suture anchor

Tenodesis of the long head of the biceps tendon is a frequently performed procedure during shoulder arthroscopy. Various open and arthroscopic techniques have been described with comparable outcomes and complication rates. We describe a simple, knotless, arthroscopic extra-articular biceps tenodesis technique using a 4.5-mm knotless anchor. This technique avoids the complications associated with open tenodesis surgery while still removing the diseased biceps tendon from the bicipital groove. The benefits from knotless suture anchor include no requirement of arthroscopic knot tying and no risk of the knot irritation under the coracoid and coracoacromial ligament.

Anatomic landmarks for arthroscopic suprapectoral biceps tenodesis: a cadaveric study

BACKGROUND

Biceps tenodesis reduces the incidence of Popeye deformity occurring with tenotomy, but pain may occur with tenodesis superior to or within the bicipital groove. Arthroscopic suprapectoral tenodesis is an attractive alternative. The purpose of this study was to establish landmarks for arthroscopic suprapectoral tenodesis and determine the appropriate fixation point to optimize muscle tension.

METHODS

Twelve fresh cadaveric shoulders were dissected. Urethane polymer was injected into the axillary artery. The position of the anterior branch of the axillary nerve was marked. The transverse humeral ligament was split, exposing the biceps (long head of the biceps [LHB]) from its origin to the pectoralis major tendon (PMT). The intra-articular portion was released. Measurements were taken from the proximal tendon to described landmarks.

RESULTS

The mean length of the intra-articular LHB was 2.53 cm (range, 1.72-3.55 cm). The mean distance from the LHB origin to the inferior lesser tuberosity (LT) was 5.58 cm (range, 4.02-6.87 cm), and that to the superior border of the PMT was 8.46 cm (range, 6.46-10.78 cm). The suprapectoral tenodesis zone (inferior LT to superior PMT) was 2.96 cm (range, 1.54-4.40 cm). In all specimens, a branch of the anterior humeral circumflex arose medial to the LHB and distal to the LT and crossed the suprapectoral zone from medial to lateral at 1.49 ± 0.42 cm proximal to the PMT, approximately at the level of the axillary nerve. The musculocutaneous nerve was on average 3.06 cm (range, 1.86-3.76 cm) from the tenodesis zone.

CONCLUSION

A branch of the anterior humeral circumflex is a reliable landmark for identifying the mid-suprapectoral zone. The distance from the proximal LHB tendon to this crossing vessel averaged 6.32 cm in female specimens and 8.28 cm in male specimens. These findings allow appropriate tensioning of the LHB during arthroscopic suprapectoral tenodesis.

Trends in the Surgical Management of Acromioclavicular Joint Arthritis Among Board-Eligible US Orthopaedic Surgeons

PURPOSE

(1) Define the epidemiologic trend of distal clavicle excision (DCE) for acromioclavicular (AC) joint arthritis among board-eligible orthopaedic surgeons in the United States, (2) describe the rates and types of reported complications of open and arthroscopic DCE, and (3) evaluate the effect of fellowship training on preferred technique and reported complication rates.

METHODS

The American Board of Orthopaedic Surgery (ABOS) database was used to identify DCE cases submitted by ABOS Part II Board Certification examination candidates. Inclusion criteria were predetermined using a combination of ICD-9 and CPT codes. Cases were dichotomized into 2 groups: open or arthroscopic DCE. The 2 groups were then analyzed to determine trends in annual incidence, complication rates, and surgeon fellowship training.

RESULTS

From April 2004 to September 2013, there were 3,229 open and 12,782 arthroscopic DCE procedures performed and submitted by ABOS Part II Board Eligible candidates. Overall, the annual incidence of open DCE decreased (78-37 cases per 10,000 submitted cases, P = .023). Although the annual number of arthroscopic DCE remained steady (1160-1125, P = .622), the percentage of DCE cases performed arthroscopically increased (65%-79%, P = .033). Surgeons without fellowship training were most likely to perform a DCE via an open approach (31%) whereas surgeons with sports medicine training were more likely to perform DCE arthroscopically compared with other fellowship groups (88%, P < .001). Open DCE was associated with a higher surgical complication rate overall when compared with arthroscopic DCE (9.4% vs 7.6%, respectively; P < .001). When compared with other fellowship-trained surgeons, sports medicine surgeons maintained a lower reported surgical complication rate whether performing open or arthroscopic DCE (5.5%, P = .027).

CONCLUSIONS

In recent years, open management of AC joint arthritis has declined among newly trained, board-eligible orthopaedic surgeons, possibly because of an increased complication rate associated with open treatment. Fellowship training was significantly associated with the type of treatment (open vs arthroscopic) rendered and complication rates.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV, case series.

Variance in Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Graft Selection based on Patient Demographics and Location within the Multicenter Orthopaedic Outcomes Network Cohort

The purpose of this study is to determine whether any regional or age-related patterns exist in graft choice for patients undergoing primary anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) within a large multicenter consortium. A retrospective cohort study was performed using data collected from the Multicenter Orthopaedic Outcomes Network (MOON) on patients having undergone primary ACLR. Patients were stratified by age group (younger than 20, 20-29, 30-39, 40-49, and 50+ years) and four demographic regions (Midwest, Southeast, Northeast, and West). A total of 2,149 patients (1,288 males, 861 females) were included. At least 70% of the patients were treated by a single surgeon in three of the four demographic regions. There were no clinically significant differences in body mass index (BMI), and no statistically significant differences in Marx activity rating scale (p > 0.05) between regions within any particular age group. There were significant differences in the proportion of autografts versus allografts used for primary ACLR between regions in every age group (p < 0.01). There were also significant differences in autograft (p < 0.001) and allograft (p < 0.001) harvest location based on demographic region. The Southeast and Northeast were more likely to use bone-patellar-tendon-bone autograft while the West and Midwest were likely to use hamstring autograft. Within our consortium, regional patterns exist both in autograft versus allograft use in patients undergoing primary ACLR, as well as harvest location of autografts and allografts. Given the similarities in average patient BMI and activity level between regions, as well as the single surgeon influence in three of the four regions, the regional patterns in graft use are likely due to surgeon preference.

Antibiotic Prophylaxis and Prevention of Surgical Site Infection in Shoulder and Elbow Surgery

Infection after orthopedic procedures is a devastating and serious complication associated with significant clinical and financial challenges to the health care system and unfortunate patient. The time and resource-intensive nature of treating infection after orthopedic procedures has turned attention toward enhancing prevention and establishing quality improvement measures. Prevention strategies throughout the perioperative period include host optimization, risk mitigation, reducing bacterial burden and proper wound management. Understanding the most common offending organisms of the shoulder, Propionibacterium acnes and coagulase negative Staphylococcus species, and their hypothesized mechanism of infection is crucial to selecting appropriate preventative measures.

Comparison of Clinical Failure Rates After 2 Techniques of Subpectoral Mini-Open Biceps Tenodesis: Sequence and Suture Passage Technique Matter

Background:

A number of techniques are available for performing biceps tenodesis, the majority of which result in good or excellent outcomes. However, failure may result in pain and/or dissatisfying biceps deformity.

Purpose:

To compare the clinical failure rates of 2 methods of suture passage in subpectoral biceps tenodesis with suture anchors performed by the senior author.

Study Design:

Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3.

Methods:

A retrospective chart review was conducted of patients who underwent biceps tenodesis under the care of the senior author. Operative notes were used to determine whether the procedure was performed with a BirdBeak (BB) suture passer or a free needle (FN). Each subsequent clinical follow-up note was used to determine participation in physical therapy and duration, follow-up duration, and whether clinical tenodesis failure had occurred. Biceps tenodesis failure was defined as either cosmetic deformity (“Popeye” sign), pain at the tenodesis site, or need for revision.

Results:

Overall, 163 patients met the inclusion criteria (BB, n = 112; FN, n = 51). Mean follow-up was 5.3 months and 4.1 months in the BB and FN groups, respectively. Significantly more tenodesis failures occurred in the BB group (BB, 12%; FN, 2%, P = .042). Among all BB patients, 10% experienced failure due to cosmetic deformity, 2% required revision, and 4% had postoperative pain at the tenodesis site by latest follow-up. The 1 patient in the FN group who experienced failure presented with cosmetic deformity postoperatively.

Conclusion:

Biceps tenodesis with the use of an FN to pass the suture resulted in a significantly lower clinical failure rate compared with the use of a BB suture passer.

Long Biceps Subpectoral Tenodesis With Suspensory Button and Bicortical Fixation

Tenodesis of the long head of the biceps (LHB) tendon has long been recognized as a valid alternative to address pathologic conditions of this tendon. However, the location and type of fixation is still a matter of discussion, because common complications associated with this procedure include failure of the repair, persistent pain, reaction to the fixation device, cosmetic deformity, and fracture. The authors describe a method of subpectoral LHB tenodesis that aims to preserve bone stock and allows a strong, easy, and reproducible type of fixation with a minimal approach. LHB tenotomy is performed arthroscopically in a standard fashion, and the tenodesis is completed with bicortical fixation in the humerus using a knotless suspensory button with an appropriate pusher originally developed for another purpose. Magnetic resonance imaging showed a safe distance between the implant and important vasculonervous structures. In the cases where subpectoral fixation is chosen, this method seems to offer additional safety as a result of the minimal amount of bone removed and the very small size of the implant.

The Effect of Concomitant Biceps Tenodesis on Reoperation Rates After Rotator Cuff Repair: A Review of a Large Private-Payer Database From 2007 to 2014

PURPOSE

To determine if reoperation rates are higher for patients who underwent isolated rotator cuff repair (RCR) than those who underwent RCR with concomitant biceps tenodesis using a large private-payer database.

METHODS

A national insurance database was queried for patients who underwent arthroscopic RCR between the years 2007 and 2014 (PearlDiver, Warsaw, IN). The Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) 29,827 (arthroscopy, shoulder, surgical; with RCR) identified RCR patients who were subdivided into 3 groups-group 1: RCR without biceps tenodesis; group 2: RCR with concomitant arthroscopic biceps tenodesis (CPT 29827 and 29,828); group 3: RCR with concomitant open biceps tenodesis (CPT 29827 and 23,430). Reoperation rates (revision RCR, subsequent biceps surgeries) and complications at 30 days, 90 days, 6 months, and 1 year were analyzed. Multivariate logistic regression was used to compare reoperations and complications between groups. Rotator cuff tear size, whether the biceps was ruptured and whether a biceps tenotomy was performed, was not available.

RESULTS

Group 1: 27,178 patients. Group 2: 4,810 patients. Group 3: 1,493 patients. More patients underwent concomitant arthroscopic than concomitant open tenodesis (P < .001). A total of 2,509 patients underwent a reoperation for RCR or biceps tenodesis within 1 year after RCR. When adjusted for age, sex, and comorbidities, no significant differences in reoperation rates at 30 days or 90 days among the 3 groups, but significantly more patients who had a tenodesis, required a reoperation compared with those who did not have a tenodesis at 6 months and 1 year (both P < .001). Urinary tract infections were more common in patients who did not have a tenodesis, whereas dislocation, nerve injury, and surgical site infection were more common in tenodesis patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Higher reoperation rates at 1 year were seen in patients who had concomitant biceps tenodesis.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, case-control database review study.

Disorders of the long head of the biceps: tenotomy versus tenodesis

Disorders of the long head of biceps tendon are common in clinical practice. Their causes could be degenerative, inflammatory, instability (subluxation or luxation) or traumatic. They are generally associated to other diseases of the shoulder, mainly rotator cuff injuries. Currently, there is controversy in the literature regarding the indications for surgical treatment and the choice of the best technique for each case, due to the possibility of esthetic deformity, loss of muscle strength, and residual pain.

The objective of this study was to identify the indications for surgical treatment, the best surgical technique, and the advantages and disadvantages of each technique described in the orthopedic literature for the treatment of long head of biceps tendon injuries.

A revision of the orthopedic medical literature on the following databases: Biblioteca Regional de Medicina (BIREME), Medline, PubMed, Cochrane Library and Google Scholar, comprising articles published in the period from 1991 to 2015.

Biceps Lesion Associated With Rotator Cuff Tears: Open Subpectoral and Arthroscopic Intracuff Tenodesis

Background:

Various tenodesis methods are being used for long head of the biceps tendon lesions. However, there is no consensus on the most appropriate surgical method.

Hypothesis:

There are significant differences in incidence of cosmetic deformity and persistent bicipital pain between open subpectoral and arthroscopic intracuff tenodesis groups.

Study Design:

Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3.

Methods:

This study included 72 patients who underwent biceps tenodesis and rotator cuff repair between January 2009 and May 2014 and who were followed for at least 1 year. Open subpectoral tenodesis was performed in 39 patients (group A), and arthroscopic intracuff tenodesis was performed in 33 patients (group B).

Results:

In group A, the mean visual analog scale (VAS) score for pain during motion and mean University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) and Constant scores significantly improved from 4.6, 18.6, and 64.5 preoperatively to 1.9, 30.5, and 86.5 at last follow-up, respectively (P < .001 for all). In group B, these scores significantly improved from 5.1, 17.6, and 62.9 preoperatively to 1.8, 31.5, and 85.9 at last follow-up, respectively (P < .001 for all). Popeye deformity was noted in 2 (5.2%) patients from group A and 5 (15.6%) patients from group B (P = .231). Additionally, persistent bicipital tenderness was noted in 1 (2.6%) patient from group A and 8 (24.2%) patients from group B (P = .012).

Conclusion:

Both open subpectoral tenodesis and arthroscopic intracuff tenodesis show good clinical outcomes for long head of the biceps tendon lesions. However, open subpectoral tenodesis may be more appropriate, considering the low incidence of Popeye deformity and tenderness.