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.

Suprapectoral biceps tenodesis with bicortical drilling procedures: anatomic analysis of chondral and axillary nerve risk with transhumeral pin guide.

BACKGROUND: Many biceps tenodesis (BT) procedures are described for treating proximal biceps pathology. Axillary nerve injury has been reported during BT using bicortical drilling techniques with variable results depending on the location. In addition, there is a risk of potential articular damage during suprapectoral BT. We sought to determine the distance between the axillary nerve and the posterior passage of a bicortical pin, as well as the risk of articular damage, and to analyze whether a lateral inclination of the pin could avoid the chondral risk during suprapectoral BT with bicortical drilling. METHODS: Ten cadaveric shoulders were divided into 2 groups. In the first group, we determined the axillary nerve distance from the posterior exit point of 3 pins in a suprapectoral position 15 mm distal to the humeral cartilage: perpendicular, 10° caudal, and 20° caudal inclination. We measured 2 distances from the pin: to the axillary nerve and to the cartilage border. In the second group, we set one pin at the same perpendicular position and set the second pin 15° laterally tilted to determine its extra-articular passage. RESULTS: No pin injured the nerve, whereas all pins showed a transchondral direction. The 20° caudal inclination was the nearest to the nerve (18.8 mm [95% confidence interval, 5.5-32 mm]), but the perpendicular position was the safer position (38.8 mm [95% confidence interval, 28-49.6 mm]). Tilting the pin direction 15° laterally prevented cartilage damage (P = .008). CONCLUSIONS: Suprapectoral BT with bicortical drilling performed 15 mm distal to the humeral cartilage is a safe procedure regarding the axillary nerve. A potential humeral chondral injury could be prevented with 15° of lateral inclination of the pin guide.

The new LassoLoop360° technique for biomechanically superior tissue grip.

PURPOSE: Suprapectoral tenodesis is a frequently used technique for treating pathologies of the long head of the biceps brachii (LHBB) tendon. However, so far, no Gold Standard treatment exist. Hence, the arthroscopic LassoLoop360 (LL360) technique is introduced aiming to provide secure fixation and improved biomechanical properties. It was hypothesized, that the LL360 technique would show superior biomechanical response to cyclic loading and ultimate load-to-failure testing compared to the commonly used simple Lasso Loop (SLL). METHODS: Twenty-two porcine superficial flexor digitorum tendons were prepared using a No. 2 suture according to either the SLL or the LL360 technique. Displacement after cyclic loading (1.000 cycles) between 5 and 30 N, ultimate load-to-failure (ULTF), mode of failure as well as the construct stiffness were tested. RESULTS: Significantly less displacement was found in the LL360 group (SLL 2.25 ± 0.51 mm; LL360 1.67 ± 0.37 mm; p = 0.01). Ultimate Load to Failure was significantly higher in the LL360 (168.6 ± 29.6 N) as compared to the SLL (124.1 ± 25.8 N, p = 0.02). The LL360 also revealed a significant higher stiffness compared to the SLL (SLL 13.1 ± 0.9 N/mm vs. LL360 19.1 ± 1.0 N/mm, p < 0.001). The most common mode of failure was the suture cutting through the tendon, with a significantly less suture cutting through for the LL360 compared with the SLL (p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: The LassoLoop360-technique offers superior biomechanical characteristics regarding the tendon-suture-interface compared to the SLL. In the initial healing phase, the suture-tendon-interface is the most vulnerable part of the tendon-suture-anchor construct, the aim of this new technique is to reduce this weakest part of the chain (Ponce et al., Am J Sports Med 39:188-194, 2011). This technique may therefore be beneficial for arthroscopic suprapectoral biceps tenodesis at the entrance of the bicipital groove.

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.

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.

Early assessment of post-surgical outcomes with pre-pectoral breast reconstruction: A literature review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Pre-pectoral breast reconstruction is an emerging surgical approach. This study provides an early assessment of outcomes with the technique. METHODS: A comprehensive literature review was performed through searches of PubMed® /MEDLINE® to identify studies on pre-pectoral reconstruction. Patient characteristics and outcomes were extracted from studies and pooled. Linear relationships between complication rates and patient characteristics with pre-pectoral reconstruction were analyzed. A meta-analysis compared complication rates between pre-pectoral and dual-plane reconstruction. RESULTS: Fourteen studies (406 women/654 breasts) were included. The most common complications with pre-pectoral reconstruction were flap necrosis (7.8%), seroma (6.7%), capsular contracture (5.8%), and explantation (4.6%). No hyperanimation was reported. Significant correlation between previous radiation and flap necrosis, post-operative chemotherapy and infection, hypertension and flap necrosis, diabetes and dehiscence, and smoking and explantation were found. A meta-analysis of four studies comparing pre-pectoral (135 women/219 breasts) and dual-plane (230/408) reconstruction found no significant difference for likelihood of infection (odds ratio, 0.46; 95% confidence interval, 0.16-1.30), explantation (0.83; 0.29-2.38), necrosis (1.61; 0.77-3.36), seroma (1.88; 0.71-5.02), dehiscence (1.84; 0.68-4.95), or capsular contracture (0.14; 0.02-1.14). CONCLUSIONS: Complication rates are comparable following pre-pectoral and dual-plane reconstruction, indicating the pre-pectoral technique may be a feasible option for appropriate patients.

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.

Biomechanical properties of suprapectoral biceps tenodesis: double knotless screw fixation is superior to single knotless screw fixation.

INTRODUCTION: The purpose of this study is to biomechanically evaluate a new technique of double knotless screw fixation for suprapectoral biceps tenodesis and compare the results with that of the single knotless screw fixation as well as the interference screw fixation. METHODS: 24 fresh-frozen human cadaveric shoulders with a mean age of 68.3 ± 9 years were studied. The specimens were randomly divided into three experimental biceps tenodesis groups (n = 8): single knotless screw, double knotless screw and interference screw. Each tenodesis specimen was mounted on a mechanical testing machine, preloaded for 2 min at 5 N, tested with cyclic loading from 5 to 70 N for 500 load cycles and subjected to an axial load to failure test (1 mm/s). The ultimate failure load, stiffness, cyclic displacement and mode of failure were evaluated. RESULTS: The interference screw fixation had the highest ultimate failure load (215.8 ± 43.1 N) and stiffness (25.7 ± 5.2 N/mm) which were significantly higher than the corresponding results for the single and double knotless screw groups (P = 0.0029). The double knotless screw group had the second highest ultimate failure load (162.8 ± 13.8 N) and stiffness (15.1 ± 4.1 N/mm) which were significantly higher than the corresponding results for the single knotless screw technique (P = 0.0002). The most common mode of failure was suture slippage for both the double (7/8) and single knotless screw (6/8) groups while biceps tendon tearing occurred most often for the interference screw group (6/8). CONCLUSION: In this biomechanical study, the double knotless screw fixation was found to have a significantly greater ultimate failure load and stiffness than the single knotless screw fixation but lower values than the interference screw fixation.

Safety of open suprapectoral and subpectoral biceps tenodesis: an anatomic assessment of risk for neurologic injury.

BACKGROUND: Surgical techniques for proximal biceps tenodesis that include penetration of the posterior humeral cortex for fixation may pose risk to the surrounding neurovascular structures. HYPOTHESIS: The risk of neurologic injury with techniques that involve penetration of the posterior humeral cortex for fixation in proximal biceps tenodesis will increase as the tenodesis site moves proximally from the subpectoral to the suprapectoral location. METHODS: Proximal biceps tenodesis was performed on 10 cadaveric upper extremities with 3 separate techniques. The proximity of the hardware to the relevant neurovascular structures was measured. The distances between the tenodesis site and the relevant neurovascular structures were measured. RESULTS: The guide pin was in direct contact with the axillary nerve in 20% of the suprapectoral tenodeses. The distance between the axillary nerve and the tenodesis site was 10.5 ± 5.5 mm for the suprapectoral location, 36.7 ± 11.2 mm in the subpectoral scenario, and 24.1 ± 11.2 mm in the 30° cephalad scenario (P = .003). The distance between the radial nerve and the anterior tenodesis site was 41.3 ± 9.3 mm for the suprapectoral location and 48.0 ± 10.7 mm for the subpectoral location. The distance of the musculocutaneous nerve from the tenodesis site was 28.4 ± 9.2 mm for the suprapectoral location and 37.4 ± 11.2 mm for the subpectoral location. CONCLUSION: In a cadaveric model of open biceps tenodesis, penetration of the posterior humeral cortex at the suprapectoral location results in proximity to the axillary nerve and should be avoided. Subpectoral bicortical button fixation drilled perpendicular to the axis of the humerus was a uniformly safe location with respect to the axillary nerve.

Arthroscopic suprapectoral biceps tenodesis utilizing the subacromial locking stitch anchor (SALSA) technique.

Biceps tenodesis is an accepted treatment option for various pathologies of the long head of the biceps tendon and labrum. Many techniques have been published, both arthroscopic and open, that utilize various fixation techniques and locations of the tenodesis, yet none has been proven to be superior. We introduce a novel method, the SALSA (subacromial locking stitch anchor), an all-arthroscopic suprapectoral biceps tenodesis utilizing a running locking stitch from a double-loaded biocomposite anchor. This technique provides a reliable method of multipoint fixation including the transverse humeral ligament that avoids many of the potential complications encountered with other techniques.

Arthroscopic Suprapectoral Biceps Tenodesis for Isolated Biceps Tendinopathy: Results From 23 Patients.

INTRODUCTION: Pathology affecting the long head of the biceps tendon (LHB) is a common cause of shoulder pain. When conservative treatment fails to resolve symptoms, surgical treatment is the modality of choice. The literature describes many arthroscopic and open techniques using different implants. However, no consensus exists on which procedure yields the greatest improvement. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of arthroscopic suprapectoral biceps tenodesis for treating isolated LHB pathology. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We present a case series of 23 patients with isolated LHB pathology who were treated with arthroscopic suprapectoral tenodesis between 2016 and 2022. All surgeries were performed by the same senior surgeon, and patients were assessed preoperatively and one year after the procedure, using the simple shoulder test (SST), Constant score (CS), and visual analog scale (VAS) by the senior surgeon. Statistical analysis was performed using the Wilcoxon Signed Rank test, with significance defined as p < 0.05. RESULTS: The CS improved from 68.52 (SD = 1.59) to 98 (SD = 7.1; p < 0.001), the SST improved from 8.78 (SD = 0.998) to 11.21 (SD = 0.42; p < 0.001), and the VAS improved from 8.26 (SD = 0.54) to 0 (SD = 0; p < 0.001) at one-year follow-up. No complications were reported postoperatively or during the follow-up period. CONCLUSIONS: Arthroscopic suprapectoral biceps tenodesis significantly improved outcomes at one-year follow-up and can be considered an effective and safe choice when treating LHB pathology.

[Arthroscopic biceps tenodesis with a «relaxed¼ technique.Clinical and radiological results of a prospective cohort]. / Tenodesis artroscópica del bíceps mediante técnica «relajada¼. Resultados clínicos y radiológicos de una cohorte prospectiva.

INTRODUCTION: in the treatment the long head of the biceps tendon (LHBT) pathology, the «relaxed tenodesis¼ is an arthroscopic articular suprapectoral tenodesis that seeks to lower the tension on the LHBT, and therefore, theoretically avoid persistent pain. OBJECTIVE: to assess clinical and radiological results of «relaxed¼ tenodesis in a prospective cohort of patient with work related illness. MATERIAL AND METHODS: prospective cohort, 54 shoulders with «relaxed¼ tenodesis performed with an intra-articular interference screw by the same surgeon, from October 2014 to 2018, in a level 1 trauma center. Demographic, clinical, functional and radiologic results were analyzed. On 6 months follow-up, a sonographic and clinical assessment was performed. RESULTS: mean age 49 ± 9, mean follow-up 16 ± 4 months. The main diagnosis was a rotator cuff tear in 79%, primary biceps pathology in 10% and other pathologies in 11%. At the end of follow-up, the cohort showed active anterior elevation 157.7 ± 22.7, external rotation 47 ± 16.6, median internal rotation T12, Constant Score 83 ± 12.05 points, subjective shoulder value 83 ± 12.97% and pain visual analogue scale 1.4 ± 1.7 points. One patient had a biceps tear and two had cosmetic arm asymmetry. On ultrasound 98% had the LHBT in situ and 10% had inflammatory changes on the bicipital groove. There were complications in 21% of the sample. CONCLUSIONS: «relaxed biceps tenodesis¼ is a technique that shows good clinical, functional and sonographic results, with low failure rate.

INTRODUCCIÓN: en el tratamiento de la patología del tendón de la cabeza larga del bíceps (TCLB) la tenodesis «relajada¼ es una tenodesis artroscópica suprapectoral alta, que busca disminuir la tensión del TCLB y, por tanto, el dolor persistente. OBJETIVO: evaluar resultados clínicos y radiológicos de la tenodesis «relajada¼ en una serie prospectiva de sujetos sometidos a compensación laboral. MATERIAL Y MÉTODOS: cohorte prospectiva de 54 hombros con tenodesis «relajada¼ con tornillo interferencial intraarticular, mismo cirujano, Octubre de 2014 a 2018, centro de trauma nivel 1. Se analizaron datos demográficos, resultados clínicos, funcionales y radiográficos. A los seis meses se realizó una ecografía de control y se evaluaron complicaciones. RESULTADOS: edad media 49 ± 9 años, seguimiento promedio 16 ± 4 meses. El diagnóstico primario fue rotura del manguito rotador en 79%, patología primaria del bíceps en 10% y otras patologías en 11%. Al término del seguimiento, la elevación anterior activa fue 157.7 ± 22.7, rotación externa 47 ± 16.6, rotación interna mediana T12, Constant Score 83 ± 12.05 puntos, valoración subjetiva del hombro 83 ± 12.97% y escala visual análoga del dolor 1.4 ± 1.7 puntos. Un paciente sufrió una rotura del bíceps y dos casos una asimetría estética del brazo. En ecografía, en 98% se visualizó el TCLB in situ y en 10% se objetivaron cambios inflamatorios en la corredera bicipital. Reportamos 21% de complicaciones. CONCLUSIONES: la tenodesis «relajada¼ presenta resultados clínicos, funcionales e imagenológicos satisfactorios, con baja tasa de fallo.

Biomechanical Analysis of Lark-Loop, Lasso-Loop and Krackow Suture Technique in Tenodesis.

OBJECTIVE: Strong tendon grasping is vital to the success of a tenodesis operation. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the initial tendon-fixation strength of the Lark-Loop technique in arthroscopic suprapectoral biceps tenodesis and compare it with others commonly used techniques. METHODS: Thirty-three porcine superficial flexor digitorum tendons were harvested from a local slaughterhouse and randomly divided into three groups to perform three tendon fixation techniques (Lasso-Loop stich group, Lark-Loop stich group or Krackow stich group; 11 tendons each group) with a No. 2 suture, respectively. Each tendon was pre-tensioned in 5°N for 2 min and then cyclically loaded 5 to 30°N for 500 cycles to assess displacement. After cyclic loading, the tendon was loaded to ultimate tendon-suture configuration failure at the rate of 1 mm/s. Finally, the mode of failure and the construct stiffness of the tendon were recorded and calculated. RESULTS: After cyclical loading, the displacement of the Lark-Loop group was equivalent to the Krakow group (P > 0.9999) but significantly smaller than the Lasso-Loop group (P = 0.0009). The ultimate load to failure for the Lark-Loop was equivalent to the Krakow technique group (P = 0.1463) but significantly greater than the Lasso-Loop group (P < 0.0001). The stiffness for the Lark-Loop was equivalent to the Krakow group (P = 0.4718) but significantly greater than the Lasso-Loop technique group (P < 0.0001). In the Lark-Loop and Krackow group, all the tendons failed by suture breakage, while all the tendons failed by suture cutting through the tendon in the Lasso-Loop technique group. CONCLUSION: Lark-Loop suture technique has biomechanical properties comparable to Krackow and superior to the Lasso-Loop in terms of suture displacement, ultimate load to failure, and stiffness. Therefore, the Lark-Loop suture fixation technique may be beneficial for arthroscopic biceps tenodesis.

Outcomes of Biceps Tenodesis Variations With Concomitant Rotator Cuff Repair: A Multicenter Database Analysis.

Background: Studies to date comparing biceps tenodesis methods in the setting of concomitant rotator cuff repair (RCR) have demonstrated relatively equivalent pain and functional outcomes. Purpose: To compare biceps tenodesis constructs, locations, and techniques in patients who underwent RCR using a large multicenter database. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: A global outcome database was queried for patients with medium- and large-sized tears who underwent biceps tenodesis with RCR between 2015 and 2021. Patients ≥18 years of age with a minimum follow-up of 1 year were included. The American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons, Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation, visual analog scale for pain, and Veterans RAND 12-Item Health Survey (VR-12) scores were compared at 1 and 2 years of follow-up based on construct (anchor, screw, or suture), location (subpectoral, suprapectoral, or top of groove), and technique (inlay or onlay). Nonparametric hypothesis testing was used to compare continuous outcomes at each time point. The proportion of patients achieving the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) at the 1- and 2-year follow-ups were compared between groups using chi-square tests. Results: A total of 1903 unique shoulder entries were analyzed. Improvement in VR-12 Mental score favored anchor and suture fixations at 1 year of follow-up (P = .042) and the onlay tenodesis technique at 2 years of follow-up (P = .029). No additional tenodesis comparisons demonstrated statistical significance. The proportion of patients with improvement exceeding the MCID did not differ based on tenodesis methods for any outcome score assessed at the 1- or 2-year follow-up. Conclusion: Biceps tenodesis with concomitant RCR led to improved outcomes regardless of tenodesis fixation construct, location, or technique. A clear optimal tenodesis method with RCR remains to be determined. Surgeon preference and experience with various tenodesis methods as well as patient clinical presentation should continue to guide surgical decision-making.

Biomechanical properties of suprapectoral biceps tenodesis with double-anchor knotless luggage tag sutures vs. subpectoral biceps tenodesis with single-anchor whipstitch suture using all-suture anchors.

Background: As the use of all-suture anchors continues to increase, limited biomechanical data on the use of these anchors in various configurations for tenodesis of the long head biceps tendon (LHBT) exists. The aim of this study was to compare the biomechanical properties of a 2-anchor luggage tag suprapectoral biceps tenodesis (Sup-BT) vs. a single-anchor whipstitch subpectoral biceps tenodesis (Sub-BT) using all-suture anchors. The hypothesis was that the Sub-BT will have a higher ultimate load to failure and less creep relative to the Sup-BT construct. Methods: Eighteen fresh frozen cadaveric humeri were used. The specimens were randomly divided into 2 groups of 9; i) The Sup-BT were performed with 2 1.8 mm knotless all-suture anchors using a luggage-tag fixation configuration, ii) The Sub-BT were performed using a single 1.9 mm all-suture anchor and a whipstitch suture configuration with a tied knot. The humeri were tested on a hydraulic MTS machine where the specimens were preloaded at 5 N for 2 minutes and then cyclically loaded from 5 to 50 N for 1000 cycles at 1 Hz while maximum displacement was recorded with a motion system and markers attached to the bone and bicep tendon. The tendon was then tensioned at a rate of 1 mm/s to obtain the ultimate load to failure. CT scans of the specimens were used to calculate the bone mineral density at the site of the anchor/bone interface and video recordings were captured during load to failure to document all modes of failure. Results: There was no significant difference in the average load to failure of the Sup-BT and Sub-BT groups (197 N ± 45 N (SD), 164 N ± 68 N (SD) respectively; P = .122) or creep under fatigue between the Sup-BT vs. Sub-BT specimens (3.1 mm, SD = 1.5 vs. 2.2 mm, SD = 0.9; P = .162). The bone mineral density was statistically different between the 2 groups (P < .001); however, there were no observed failures at the anchor/bone interface and no correlation between failure load and bone mineral density. Conclusion: The ultimate load to failure and creep between a Sup-BT with 2 knotless all-suture anchors using a luggage tag suture configuration was equivalent to a Sub-BT with 1 all-suture anchor using a whipstitched suture configuration and a tied knot. Surgeons can perform either technique confidently knowing that they are biomechanically equivalent in a cadaver model at time zero, and they offer similar strength to other fixation methods cited in the literature.

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.

Suprapectoral versus subpectoral tenodesis for Long Head Biceps Brachii tendinopathy: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Suprapectoral long head biceps (LHB) tenodesis and subpectoral LHB tenodesis are both commonly performed surgical procedures. Due to the more proximal position of the suprapectoral tenodesis site this technique may be accompanied with more postoperative pain in the bicipital groove and cramping pain in the biceps muscle. We hypothesized that subpectoral tenodesis is associated with a better clinical outcome than suprapectoral tenodesis. METHODS: A literature search was conducted in PubMed and Embase from January 2000 to July 2019 with the terms "biceps" and "tenodesis". Only comparing studies reporting on American Shoulder Elbow Score (ASES), VAS for anterior shoulder pain, Constant Murley Score (CMS), pain in the bicipital groove and Popeye deformity following suprapectoral and subpectoral tenodesis were included. Quality assessment of included articles was performed using the Coleman score. RESULTS: Seven comparative studies with 409 patients reporting the results of LHB suprapectoral and subpectoral tenodesis were included. A significant, but clinically irrelevant difference in ASES (mean difference 2.15) p=0.01 was observed. No significant difference in CMS (mean difference 0.09), VAS for anterior shoulder pain (mean difference 0.01), Popeye deformity (odds ratio 3.19) and persistent bicipital pain (odds ratio 2.66). The Coleman score ranged between 53 and 87. CONCLUSION: Based on this meta-analysis we found a significantly, though not clinically relevant difference in ASES in favour of subpectoral LHB tenodesis when compared with suprapectoral LHB tenodesis. Comparable results were found with regard to outcome scores, pain in the bicipital groove and avoiding a Popeye deformity.

Biomechanical comparison of the three techniques for arthroscopic suprapectoral biceps tenodesis: implant-free intraosseous tendon fixation with Cobra Guide, interference screw and suture anchor.

PURPOSE: A new arthroscopic technique with Cobra Guide (CG) was developed to enable fast, controlled and strong intraosseous biceps tenodesis while avoiding an implant. The purpose of this study was to compare the newly developed suture-only biceps tenodesis technique [arthroscopic suprapectoral intraosseous implant-free biceps tenodesis (ASIIBT) with the new CG] to classical interference screws (IS) and suture anchors (SA) in terms of construct resistance to failure. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Fifty-eight human cadaveric shoulders were randomized into three treatment groups. Twenty shoulders received an IS, 19 SA and 19 ASIIBT. A biceps tenodesis was performed according to the techniques listed above. Cyclic loading tests on a dynamic loading testing device were used to measure and compare the resistance to failure pullout between the three groups. Hartley's Fmax test and Tukey's Honest Significant Difference method were used for statistical analysis. RESULTS: The construct with the greatest resistance was ASIIBT. Its resistance was statistically higher compared to the IS technique (p = 0.001). Resistance compared to the SA technique was not statistically significant (p = 0.123), although in seven cases ASIIBT resisted more than 50 cycles at 200 N, while the SA technique reached 50 cycles at 200 N in just two cases. During cyclic loading, each specimen failed at the tenodesis site. CONCLUSIONS: ASIIBT showed higher failure loads compared with IS and SA. Better construct performance of ASIIBT is due to greater absorption of distension forces which may improve final tenodesis healing. Also, the absence of an implant lowers additional costs and the chances for postoperative complications may be decreased significantly.

Anatomic limitations of biceps tenodesis using an interference screw for Asian people: a cadaveric study.

BACKGROUND: Biceps tenodesis using an interference screw has been commonly performed in clinical practice because of pathologic changes. Especially, the tenodesis distal to the bicipital groove, such as suprapectoral tenodesis (SPT) and subpectoral tenodesis (SBT), has been performed to avoid residual anterior shoulder pain. However, the techniques were developed based on research tested on Western population, and it is unknown whether they are applicable to Asian individuals, who have a smaller humerus than Western. The purpose of this study was to investigate the anatomic limitations of the biceps tenodesis using an interference screw for Asians. METHODS: We analyzed 22 fixed Japanese cadavers. We measured the length of the suprapectoral tenodesis zone (STZ), which is the area from the distal end of the lesser tuberosity to the proximal border of the insertion of the pectoralis major muscle tendon (PMMT) along the course of the biceps tendon, for the SPT. We also measured the bone tunnel depths (BTDs) for the SPT just distal to the lesser tuberosity along the course of the biceps tendon and, similarly, for the SBT just distal to the PMMT insertion. Finally, we analyzed the sexual differences and correlations of the measured values with the entire humeral length. RESULTS: In 9 shoulders (40.9%), the proximal border of the PMMT insertion was attached more proximally than the distal end of the lesser tuberosity, and the length of the STZ was negative. The mean BTDs in the SPT and SBT zones were 19.6 and 14.9 mm, respectively. In 11 shoulders (50%), the BTD in the SBT zone was shorter than 15 mm. The lengths of the STZ or BTDs in the SPT and SBT zones did not show statistical differences between sexes and were not correlated with the entire humeral length. CONCLUSION: Asian patients would have anatomic limitations as follows for the biceps tenodesis regardless of their sex or body size. In anomalous PMMT cases, when the SPT was performed just proximal to the PMMT insertion, the bone tunnel entered into the bicipital groove. On the other hand, when the SPT was performed distal to the lesser tuberosity, a part of the PMMT insertion would be injured. Regarding the SBT, an interference screw with a length of ≥12 mm, which is commonly used in Western countries, is too long for Asians.

Are Implant Choice and Surgical Approach Associated With Biceps Tenodesis Construct Strength? A Systematic Review and Meta-regression.

BACKGROUND: Despite the increasing use of biceps tenodesis, there is a lack of consensus regarding optimal implant choice (suture anchor vs interference screw) and implant placement (suprapectoral vs subpectoral). PURPOSE/HYPOTHESIS: The purpose was to determine the associations of procedural parameters with the biomechanical performance of biceps tenodesis constructs. The authors hypothesized that ultimate failure load (UFL) would not differ between sub- and suprapectoral repairs or between interference screw and suture anchor constructs and that the number of implants and number of sutures would be positively associated with construct strength. STUDY DESIGN: Meta-analysis. METHODS: The authors conducted a systematic literature search for studies that measured the biomechanical performance of biceps tenodesis repairs in human cadaveric specimens. Two independent reviewers extracted data from studies that met the inclusion criteria. Meta-regression was then performed on the pooled data set. Outcome variables were UFL and mode of failure. Procedural parameters (fixation type, fixation site, implant diameter, and numbers of implants and sutures used) were included as covariates. Twenty-five biomechanical studies, representing 494 cadaveric specimens, met the inclusion criteria. RESULTS: The use of interference screws (vs suture anchors) was associated with a mean 86 N-greater UFL (95% CI, 34-138 N; P = .002). Each additional suture used to attach the tendon to the implant was associated with a mean 53 N-greater UFL (95% CI, 24-81 N; P = .001). Multivariate analysis found no significant association between fixation site and UFL. Finally, the use of suture anchors and fewer number of sutures were both independently associated with lower odds of native tissue failure as opposed to implant pullout. CONCLUSION: These findings suggest that fixation with interference screws, rather than suture anchors, and the use of more sutures are associated with greater biceps tenodesis strength, as well as higher odds of native tissue failure versus implant pullout. Although constructs with suture anchors show inferior UFL compared with those with interference screws, incorporation of additional sutures may increase the strength of suture anchor constructs. Supra- and subpectoral repairs provide equivalent biomechanical strength when controlling for potential confounders.