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

Biceps Tenodesis Versus Superior Labral Anterior and Posterior (SLAP) Lesion Repair for the Treatment of SLAP Lesion in Overhead Athletes: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Superior labral anterior and posterior (SLAP) lesions are common injuries in overhead athletes. As a surgical treatment for SLAP lesions, SLAP repair has been traditionally performed. Recently, biceps tenodesis has been performed as an alternative treatment option; however, there is no review for outcome comparisons between these 2 procedures in overhead athletes.

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to compare the outcomes of SLAP repair versus biceps tenodesis, especially in overhead athletes with SLAP lesions.

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic review and meta-analysis; Level of evidence, 4.

METHODS

An electronic literature search was performed in Medline, Embase, Scopus, and the Cochrane Library. The studies were appraised using the Methodological Index for Non-randomized Studies (MINORS) tool. Studies that had a minimum follow-up of 2 years, included only patients with SLAP lesions without other major shoulder pathologies, and included only patients who engaged in overhead sports were included. The functional outcomes of the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) score, rate of return to sport, rate of return to preinjury level of sport, and complication rate were subjected to meta-analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 332 articles were identified, and 13 were included in the systematic review. Even though the postoperative ASES scores were slightly higher in the biceps tenodesis group than in the SLAP repair group, no statistically significant differences were found between the groups (biceps tenodesis, 95% CI = 91.71-96.75, I² = 0.00; SLAP repair, 95% CI = 85.47-94.46, I² = 16.3; P = .085) The rate of return to sport and the return to preinjury level of sport were slightly higher in the biceps tenodesis group than in the SLAP repair group; however, in meta-analysis these factors did not reach statistical significance (return to sport: biceps tenodesis, 95% CI = 0.66-0.91, I² = 0.00; SLAP repair, 95% CI = 0.68-0.93, I² = 70.23; P = .94) (return to preinjury level of sport: biceps tenodesis, 95% CI = 0.61-0.89, I² = 17.78; SLAP repair, 95% CI = 0.53-0.82, I² = 58.07; P = .37). The biceps tenodesis group showed a lower complication rate compared with the SLAP repair group without statistical significance (biceps tenodesis, 95% CI = 0.013-0.145, I² = 0.00; SLAP repair, 95% CI = 0.049-0.143, I² = 0.00; P = .25).

CONCLUSION

The results of biceps tenodesis, compared with SLAP repair, were not inferior in the surgical treatment of overhead athletes with SLAP lesions with regard to the ASES score, rate of return to sport, rate of return to preinjury level of sport, and complication rate. Further high-level, randomized controlled studies are needed to confirm this result.

Management of Failed SLAP Repair: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Superior labrum anterior to posterior (SLAP) tears are a very common shoulder injury. The success rate of SLAP repair, particularly in the throwing athlete, has been variable in the literature.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES

The purpose of this systematic review was to evaluate the reported post-operative outcomes of management techniques for failed SLAP repair.

METHODS

The electronic databases MEDLINE, Embase, and PubMed were searched for relevant studies, and pertinent data was abstracted. Only studies reporting outcomes of management techniques for failed SLAP repairs were included.

RESULTS

A total of 10 studies (levels III to IV) evaluating 176 patients were included in this systematic review. Most subjects were male (86.6%), with a mean age at surgery of 36.3 years (range, 17 to 67 years). The most commonly reported reason for failed SLAP repair was persistent post-operative mechanical symptoms after index SLAP repair. Common techniques used in the management of failed SLAP repair include biceps tenodesis and revision SLAP repair. Return to activity was significantly higher after biceps tenodesis than after arthroscopic revision SLAP repair. However, compared to primary SLAP repair, biceps tenodesis demonstrated no statistically significant differences in return to work rates. Complications reported in one case were resolved post-operatively, and there was no reported revision failure or reoperation after revision surgery.

CONCLUSION

The most common reason for failed SLAP repair is persistent post-operative mechanical symptoms. Revision surgery for failed SLAP repair has a high success rate. The rate of return to activity after biceps tenodesis was significantly higher than the rate after revision SLAP repair. Large high-quality randomized trials are required to provide definitive evidence to support the optimal treatment for failed SLAP repair.

Arthroscopic Low-Profile Knotless Repair of SLAP Tears With Suture Tape

SLAP tears have been a controversial topic in shoulder surgery for decades. The indications for repair of SLAP tears, as well as the methods of repair, have undergone a recent evolution. The use of intra-articular knots for SLAP repair has fallen out of favor because of potential abrasive damage to the rotator cuff and glenohumeral articular cartilage due to knot migration and prominence. In response to this potential iatrogenic injury, arthroscopic techniques have undergone an evolution using advanced techniques with low-profile knotless repairs. We describe our preferred low-profile knotless technique for SLAP repair using LabralTape (Arthrex) in a horizontal mattress configuration.

Arthroscopic Repair of Type II SLAP Lesions in Overhead Athletes

For overhead athletes and, in particular, baseball pitchers, the rates of success and return to play for those who have undergone arthroscopic repair of type II SLAP lesions are poor, ranging from 7% to 62%. The reasons for the poor results and high failure rates in overhead athletes with type II SLAP repairs are multifactorial and are a combination of many factors. These factors include the failure to establish the diagnosis and treat these athletes preoperatively; the inability of the operating surgeon to differentiate normal anatomic variants from pathologic SLAP lesions at the time of surgery; the surgical technique, which may violate the rotator cuff; or the placement of suture anchors, which restricts external rotation and alters overhead throwing mechanics. The proper diagnosis of SLAP lesions can be difficult because SLAP tears rarely occur in isolation and are often associated with other shoulder pathology. A proper history detailing the onset of symptoms and whether there was an acute episode of trauma or a history of repetitive use is critical. It is important to remember that no single physical examination finding is pathognomonic for SLAP tears. When seen in isolation, SLAP tears may mimic impingement syndrome (52%) or even anterior instability (39%). Surgical treatment of type II SLAP lesions should not be undertaken lightly in overhead athletes. If a 3-month rehabilitation period followed by a return to sports over the following 3 months does not allow the athlete to return to his or her preinjury level, diagnostic arthroscopy with SLAP repair is a reasonable option and can yield excellent results using the proper techniques. The technique described in detail in this article and our video can be technically demanding, but with the key points outlined, it can be reproduced and provide excellent results for overhead athletes undergoing SLAP repair. By not violating the rotator cuff, using a mattress configuration and keeping the suture knot away from the articular surface, and by not going anterior to the biceps tendon for repair, external rotation and strength can be preserved, leading to an excellent result with a predictable return to play for overhead athletes.

Labral Repair Versus Biceps Tenodesis for Primary Surgical Management of Type II Superior Labrum Anterior to Posterior Tears: A Systematic Review

PURPOSE

To examine the outcomes of SLAP repair versus biceps tenodesis (BT) for the index treatment of isolated type II SLAP tears.

METHODS

A search of PubMed, MEDLINE, and EMBASE was performed in April 2018 for English-language studies that presented outcomes data on patients with isolated type II SLAP tears treated with either SLAP repair or BT at the primary surgical time point.

RESULTS

Twenty-three studies (i.e., 2 randomized control trials, 7 retrospective cohort, 3 prospective cohort, 4 case-control, and 7 case series) were included. Isolated type II SLAP tears were treated via SLAP repair in 781 patients with a mean age of 35 years (range, 22-58 years) and a mean postoperative follow-up of 35 months (range, 3-63 months). BT was performed in 100 patients with a mean age of 44 years (range, 18-64 years) and a mean postoperative follow-up of 32 months (range, 24-75 months). Similar postoperative scores were noted in both the SLAP repair and BT groups for American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons, Constant, University of California, Los Angeles, and visual analog scale pain scores. The rate of return to sports was 20% to 95% for SLAP repair and 73% to 100% for BT. Reoperation rates for SLAP repair and BT were 2.9% to 40% and 0% to 15.3%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

This study suggests that SLAP repair and BT are both acceptable as index treatment for isolated type II SLAP tears. SLAP repair remains the most commonly performed index procedure; however, BT appears equally efficacious and may represent an attractive alternative.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV, systematic review of Level I through IV studies.

Remplissage Using Interconnected Knotless Anchors: Superior Biomechanical Properties to a Knotted Technique?

PURPOSE

To evaluate the biomechanical fixation strength and gap formation of 2 different remplissage fixation methods (double pulley knotted construct and interconnected knotless repair construct) in cadaver specimens.

METHODS

Seven matched pairs of human cadaveric shoulders were used for testing (mean age, 56 ± 10 years). A shoulder from each matched pair was randomly selected to receive a Hill-Sachs remplissage using either a knotted (No. 2 FiberWire double pulley with 3.0-mm SutureTak anchors) or knotless (coreless No. 2 FiberWire interconnected between 3.9-mm knotless CorkScrew anchors) double mattress construct. The tendon was cycled between 10 and 100 N at 1 Hz for 100 cycles, followed by a single-cycle pull to failure at 33 mm/s. Cyclic displacement, load to clinical failure (5 mm), yield load, and mode of failure were recorded.

RESULTS

Neither construct demonstrated clinical failure under cyclic loading. Load to clinical failure was higher for the knotless repair than that of the knotted repair (788 ± 162 N vs 488 ± 227 N; P = .003). The yield load was higher for the knotless repair than that of the knotted repair (1,080 ± 298 N vs 591 ± 265 N; P = .008). The most common failure mode for the knotted repair was knot failure or tendon tearing, whereas the failure mode for the knotless repair was by anchor pull-out or tendon tear with no failures occurring via the interconnected suture construct mechanism.

CONCLUSIONS

In this biomechanical study comparing cyclic and ultimate loading for 2 double mattress remplissage repairs, the construct using interconnected, knotless sutures outperformed the knotted construct. No failure of the interconnected suture construct mechanism by slippage or breakage was observed in the knotless group.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

The use of the interconnected knotless suture technique might improve the biomechanical strength of arthroscopic remplissage repairs in treating shoulder instability.

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.

Diagnosis and Treatment of Injuries to the Biceps and Superior Labral Complex in Overhead Athletes

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This review discusses the diagnostic and treatment challenges presented by injuries to the biceps and superior labral complex.

RECENT FINDINGS

A focused patient history, numerous physical examination maneuvers, and appropriate advanced imaging studies must be utilized to reach an accurate diagnosis. Nonoperative management, even in overhead athletes, has demonstrated relatively good outcomes, while operative outcomes have yielded mixed results. The surgeon must take into account a number of variables when choosing the appropriate surgical procedure: labral repair versus biceps tenodesis. Rehabilitation, either as nonoperative management or as a postoperative protocol, should focus on restoring glenohumeral and scapulothoracic strength, endurance, and full, pain-free range of motion, while correcting any deficiencies in balance or rhythm throughout the overhead motion. Despite the operative treatment challenges that SLAP tears present, with new techniques and proper patient selection, overhead athletes with injuries to the biceps and superior labrum complex can return to sport at a high level.