All-suture anchor size and drill angle influence load to failure in a porcine model of subpectoral biceps tenodesis, a biomechanical study.

BACKGROUND: Tenodesis of the long head of the biceps tendon is frequently performed in shoulder surgery, and all-suture anchors have become more popular as fixation methods. However, uncertainty still exists regarding the ultimate load to failure of all-suture anchors and the best insertion angle at a cortical humeral insertion point. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to compare the biomechanical characteristics of three types of all-suture anchors frequently used for biceps tenodesis. In addition, the influence of two different insertion angles was observed in a porcine humeri model. METHODS: The ultimate load to failure and failure mode of three types of all-suture anchors (1.6 FiberTak®, 1.9 FiberTak®, 2.6 FiberTak®, Arthrex®) applicable for subpectoral biceps tenodesis were evaluated at 90° and 45° insertion angles in 12 fresh-frozen porcine humeri. The anchors were inserted equally alternated in a randomized manner at three different insertion sites along the bicipital groove, and the suture tapes were knotted around a rod for pullout testing. In total, 36 anchors were evaluated in a universal testing machine (Zwick & Roell). RESULTS: The 2.6 FiberTak® shows higher ultimate loads to failure with a 90° insertion angle (944.0 N ± 169.7 N; 537.0 N ± 308.8 N) compared to the 1.9 FiberTak® (677.8 N ± 57.7 N; 426.3 N ± 167.0 N, p-value: 0.0080) and 1.6 FiberTak® (733.0 N ± 67.6 N; 450.0 N ± 155.8 N, p-value: 0.0018). All anchor types show significantly higher ultimate loads to failure and smaller standard deviations at the 90° insertion angle than at the 45° insertion angle. The major failure mode was anchor pullout. Only the 2.6 FiberTak® anchors showed suture breakage as the major failure mode when placed with a 90° insertion angle. CONCLUSIONS: All three all-suture anchors are suitable fixation methods for subpectoral biceps tenodesis. Regarding our data, we recommend 90° as the optimum insertion angle. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The influence of anchor size and insertion angle of an all-suture anchor should be known by the surgeon for optimizing ultimate loads to failure and for achieving a secure fixation.

Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Plus Lateral Extra-articular Tenodesis Has a Similar Return-to-Sport Rate to Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Alone but a Lower Failure Rate.

PURPOSE: To determine whether the addition of lateral extra-articular tenodesis (LET) to anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) would improve return-to-sport (RTS) rates in young, active patients who play high-risk sports. METHODS: This multicenter randomized controlled trial compared standard hamstring tendon ACLR with combined ACLR and LET using a strip of the iliotibial band (modified Lemaire technique). Patients aged 25 years or younger with an anterior cruciate ligament-deficient knee were included. Patients also had to meet 2 of the following criteria: (1) pivot-shift grade 2 or greater, (2) participation in a high-risk or pivoting sport, and (3) generalized ligamentous laxity. Time to return and level of RTS were determined via administration of a questionnaire at 24 months postoperatively. RESULTS: We randomized 618 patients in this study, 553 of whom played high-risk sports preoperatively. The proportion of patients who did not RTS was similar between the ACLR (11%) and ACLR-LET (14%) groups; however, the graft rupture rate was significantly different (11.2% in ACLR group vs 4.1% in ACLR-LET group, P = .004). The most cited reason for no RTS was lack of confidence and/or fear of reinjury. A stable knee was associated with nearly 2 times greater odds of returning to a high-level high-risk sport postoperatively (odds ratio, 1.92; 95% confidence interval, 1.11-3.35; P = .02). There were no significant differences in patient-reported functional outcomes or hop test results between groups (P > .05). Patients who returned to high-risk sports had better hamstring symmetry than those who did not RTS (P = .001). CONCLUSIONS: At 24 months postoperatively, patients who underwent ACLR plus LET had a similar RTS rate to those who underwent ACLR alone. Although the subgroup analysis did not show a statistically significant increase in RTS with the addition of LET, on returning, the addition of LET kept subjects playing longer by reducing graft failure rates. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level I, randomized controlled trial.

Editorial Commentary: The Number One Cause of Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Graft Failure Is a Misplaced Femoral Tunnel: Over-the-Top Technique Plus Lateral Extra-Articular Tenodesis Is Recommended.

Patient factors (notably high tibial slope and narrow femoral intercondylar notch width) and surgical factors (including meniscus treatment and anterior cruciate ligament [ACL] tunnel position) contribute to ACL reconstruction failure. The number one cause of failure is a misplaced ACL femoral tunnel. Tunnel malposition leads to a higher incidence of postoperative meniscal lesions, inferior clinical outcomes, and higher revision rates.

The Iliotibial Band is the Main Secondary Stabilizer for Anterolateral Rotatory Instability and both a Lemaire Tenodesis and Anterolateral Ligament Reconstruction Can Restore Native Knee Kinematics in the Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstructed Knee: A Systematic Review of Biomechanical Cadaveric Studies.

PURPOSE: To obtain a comprehensive overview of comparative biomechanical cadaveric studies investigating the effect of both the iliotibial band (ITB) and anterolateral ligament (ALL) on anterolateral rotatory instability (ALRI) in anterior cruciate ligament (ACL)-injured knees, and the effect of lateral extra-articular tenodesis (LET) versus ALL reconstruction (ALLR) in ACL-reconstructed knees. METHODS: An electronic search was performed in the Embase and MEDLINE databases for the period between January 1, 2010, and October 1, 2022. All sectioning studies comparing the role of both the ITB and ALL on ALRI and all studies comparing the effect of both LET and ALLR were included. Articles were assessed for methodological quality according to the Quality Appraisal for Cadaveric Studies scale. RESULTS: Data of 15 studies were included, representing the mean values of biomechanical data collected from 203 cadaveric specimens, with sample sizes ranging from 10 to 20 specimens. All 6 sectioning studies reported that the ITB acts as a secondary stabilizer to the ACL and helps resist internal knee rotation, whereas in only 2 of 6 sectioning studies the ALL contributed significantly to tibial internal rotation (IR). Most reconstruction studies reported that both a modified Lemaire tenodesis and an ALLR could significantly reduce the residual ALRI in isolated ACL-reconstructed knees and were able to restore IR stability/IR stability during the pivot shift. CONCLUSIONS: The ITB acts as the main secondary stabilizer to the ACL in resisting IR/IR during pivot shift and an anterolateral corner (ALC) reconstruction with either a modified Lemaire tenodesis and ALLR can improve residual knee rotatory laxity in ACL reconstructed knees. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: This systematic review provides insight in the biomechanical function of the ITB and ALL and emphasizes the importance of adding an ALC reconstruction to ACL reconstruction.

Effects of an assist-as-needed equipped Tenodesis-Induced-Grip Exoskeleton Robot (TIGER) on upper limb function in patients with chronic stroke.

BACKGROUND: The original version of the Tenodesis-Induced-Grip Exoskeleton Robot (TIGER) significantly improved the motor and functional performance of the affected upper extremity of chronic stroke patients. The assist-as-needed (AAN) technique in robot-involved therapy is widely favored for promoting patient active involvement, thereby fostering motor recovery. However, the TIGER lacked an AAN control strategy, which limited its use in different clinical applications. The present study aimed to develop and analyze the training effects of an AAN control mode to be integrated into the TIGER, to analyze the impact of baseline patient characteristics and training paradigms on outcomes for individuals with chronic stroke and to compare training effects on the upper limb function between using the AAN-equipped TIGER and using the original prototype. METHODS: This was a single-arm prospective interventional study which was conducted at a university hospital. In addition to 20 min of regular task-specific motor training, each participant completed a 20-min robotic training program consisting of 10 min in the AAN control mode and 10 min in the functional mode. The training sessions took place twice a week for 9 weeks. The primary outcome was the change score of the Fugl-Meyer Assessment of the Upper Extremity (FMA-UE), and the secondary outcomes were the change score of the Box and Blocks Test (BBT), the amount of use (AOU) and quality of movement (QOM) scales of the Motor Activity Log (MAL), the Semmes-Weinstein Monofilament (SWM) test, and the Modified Ashworth Scale (MAS) for fingers and wrist joints. The Generalized Estimating Equations (GEE) and stepwise regression model were used as the statistical analysis methods. RESULTS: Sixteen chronic stroke patients completed all steps of the study. The time from stroke onset to entry into the trial was 21.7 ± 18.9 months. After completing the training with the AAN-equipped TIGER, they exhibited significant improvements in movement reflected in their total score (pre/post values were 34.6 ± 11.5/38.5 ± 13.4) and all their sub-scores (pre/post values were 21.5 ± 6.0/23.3 ± 6.5, 9.5 ± 6.2/11.3 ± 7.2, and 3.6 ± 1.0/3.9 ± 1.0 for the shoulder, elbow, and forearm sub-category, the wrist and hand sub-category, and the coordination sub-category, respectively) on the FMA-UE (GEE, p < 0.05), as well as their scores on the BBT (pre/post values were 5.9 ± 6.5/9.5 ± 10.1; GEE, p = 0.004) and the AOU (pre/post values were 0.35 ± 0.50/0.48 ± 0.65; GEE, p = 0.02). However, the original TIGER exhibited greater improvements in their performance on the FMA-UE than the participants training with the AAN-equipped TIGER (GEE, p = 0.008). The baseline score for the wrist and hand sub-category of the FMA-UE was clearly the best predictor of TIGER-mediated improvements in hand function during the post-treatment assessment (adjusted R2 = 0.282, p = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: This study developed an AAN-equipped TIGER system and demonstrated its potential effects on improving both the function and activity level of the affected upper extremity of patients with stroke. Nevertheless, its training effects were not found to be advantageous to the original prototype. The baseline score for the FMA-UE sub-category of wrist and hand was the best predictor of improvements in hand function after TIGER rehabilitation. Clinical trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov, identifier NCT03713476; date of registration: October19, 2018. https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03713476.

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.

No clinical difference in outcomes between inlay and onlay arthroscopic biceps tenodesis techniques during rotator cuff repair.

BACKGROUND: Both inlay and onlay arthroscopic biceps tenodesis (ABT) are common procedures performed during rotator cuff repair. The inlay method involves creating a bone socket in the bicipital groove to secure the long head of the biceps tendon using an interference screw. The onlay method utilizes a suture anchor to secure the long head of the biceps tendon on the surface of the bicipital groove. Little is known on the long-term differences in patient-reported outcomes between these 2 techniques. The primary purpose of this study was to compare patient-reported outcomes of inlay vs. onlay ABT with a minimum follow-up of 2 years. Secondary aims were to evaluate the impact of rotator cuff tear size on outcomes and compare rates of complications between the 2 techniques. METHODS: A retrospective chart review was performed to identify patients who had an ABT during a full-thickness rotator cuff repair. Any symptom specific to the biceps were noted, including pain and cramping, Popeye deformity, or revision surgery. Complication rates were compared between groups. The visual analog scale pain score, American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES), Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation, and Veteran's RAND-12 score (VR-12) scores were compared at 2 years. The impact of rotator cuff tear size was analyzed by categorizing into small/medium or large/massive based on operative reports and arthroscopic images. RESULTS: There were 165 patients identified (106 in the inlay group and 59 in the onlay group). No revision surgeries were performed secondary to the biceps tendon in either group. Eleven patients (10%) in the inlay group complained of biceps pain or cramping compared to 2 patients (3%) in the onlay group (P = .11). One Popeye deformity was noted in each group (P = .67). No significant differences were found between groups for visual analog scale (P = .41), ASES functional (P = .61), ASES index (P = .91), Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (P = .09), VR-12 Physical Component Score (P = .77), or VR-12 Mental Component Score (P = .09). Rotator cuff tear size within the groups also did not demonstrate statistical significance. CONCLUSION: No clinical differences or complications were found at minimum 2-year follow-up between inlay and onlay ABT in patients undergoing rotator cuff repair when controlling for tear size. The clinical relevance suggests either technique is effective and can be based on surgeon preference.

Superior labrum anterior to posterior (SLAP) repair is associated with increased rate of subsequent rotator cuff diagnoses and revision surgery: a propensity-matched comparison.

BACKGROUND: Surgical management of superior labral anterior to posterior (SLAP) tears remains controversial. Current management utilizes 2 well-established procedures: biceps tenodesis and SLAP repair. This study evaluates the complications associated with arthroscopic SLAP repair vs. an open or arthroscopic biceps tenodesis to further elucidate optimal surgical management. METHODS: In this retrospective cohort study, the TriNetX database was utilized to evaluate patients who underwent repair of SLAP lesions (International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision code: S43.43) from May 15, 2003, to May 15, 2023. Three patient cohorts were evaluated: those who underwent arthroscopic SLAP repair (Current Procedural Terminology [CPT] code: 29807), those who underwent arthroscopic biceps tenodesis (CPT code: 29828), and those who underwent open tenodesis of the biceps (CPT code: 23430). Cohorts were propensity matched for type 2 diabetes, nicotine dependence, alcohol-related disorders, body mass index, and demographic factors such as age at event, ethnicity, race, and sex. The outcomes evaluated were disruption of surgical wound, deep vein thrombosis, mononeuropathy of upper limb, shoulder contusion, humeral fracture, sepsis, deceased, acute postoperative pain, revision, shoulder stiffness, and rotator cuff strain. All outcomes were evaluated within 1 year postprocedure. RESULTS: A total of 11,081 arthroscopic SLAP repairs, 9960 arthroscopic biceps tenodesis, and 9420 open biceps tenodesis were matched. Compared with patients who underwent arthroscopic biceps tenodesis, those who underwent arthroscopic SLAP repair were 1.8 times more likely to undergo revision (2.9% vs. 1.6%, P < .0001). Compared with those who underwent open biceps tenodesis, patients who had SLAP repair performed were 1.4 times more likely to undergo revision (3.1% vs. 2.3%, P = .013) and 1.6 times more likely to have a subsequent rotator cuff strain diagnosis (5.1% vs. 3.2%, P = .0002). Compared with patients who underwent SLAP repair, those who underwent arthroscopic biceps tenodesis exhibited 1.3 times more instances of acute postoperative pain (5.2% vs. 4.0%, P = .011). Similarly, open biceps tenodesis exhibited 1.8 times more instances of acute postoperative pain (6.9% vs. 3.8%, P < .0001) and 1.3 times more shoulder stiffness (11.8% vs. 9.0%, P < .0001). CONCLUSION: In the last 20 years, patients who underwent SLAP repair were associated with higher risk of revision surgery and subsequent rotator cuff strain diagnosis. Conversely, patients who underwent biceps tenodesis were associated with higher rates of acute postoperative pain and shoulder stiffness.

Patient-reported outcomes of arthroscopic repair for partial or full-thickness upper third subscapularis tendon tears with open sub-pectoral biceps tenodesis: minimum 10-year outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Although short-term results are promising, there are limited data for long-term results of arthroscopic subscapularis (SSC) repair. The purpose of this study is to report minimum 10-year outcomes of primary arthroscopic repair of isolated partial or full-thickness tears of the upper third of the SSC tendon. METHODS: Patients who underwent arthroscopic repair of isolated upper third SSC tears, Lafosse type I (>50% of tendon thickness) or type II were included. Surgeries were performed by a single surgeon between November 2005 and August 2011. Patient-reported outcome measures were prospectively collected and retrospectively reviewed at minimum follow-up of 10 years. Patient-reported outcomes utilized included the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score, Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation score (SANE), Quick Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand score (QuickDASH), the Short Form 12 physical component summary, return to activity, and patient satisfaction. A subanalysis of patient age and outcomes was performed. Retears, revision surgeries, and surgical complications were recorded. RESULTS: In total, 29 patients with isolated upper third SSC repairs were identified. After application of exclusion criteria, 14 patients were included in the final analysis. Follow-up could be obtained from 11 patients. The mean age at surgery was 52.7 years (range: 36-72) and the mean follow-up was 12 years (range 10-15 years). The American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score improved from 52.9 ± 21.8 preoperatively to 92.2 ± 13.7 postoperatively (P < .001). Regarding the SANE and QuickDASH scores, only postoperative data were available. Mean postoperative SANE, QuickDASH, and Short Form 12 physical component summary scores were 90.27 ± 10.5, 14.6 ± 15.5, and 49.2 ± 6.6, respectively. Median patient satisfaction was 10 (range 6-10). Patients reported improvements in sleep, activities of daily living, and sports. There was no correlation between patient age and clinical outcome (P > .05). No patients underwent revision surgery for a SSC retear. CONCLUSION: Arthroscopic repair of upper third SSC tendon tears leads to improved clinical scores and high patient satisfaction at minimum 10-year follow-up. The procedure is durable, with no failures in the presented cohort.

Shear wave elastography correlates to degeneration and stiffness of the long head of the biceps tendon in patients undergoing tenodesis with arthroscopic shoulder surgery.

BACKGROUND: Tendinopathy of the long head of the biceps (LHB) tendon causes degeneration and changes its stiffness. However, a reliable means of diagnosis has not been established. Shear wave elastography (SWE) provides quantitative tissue elasticity measurements. In this study, the relationship of preoperative SWE values with biomechanically measured stiffness and degeneration of the LHB tendon tissue was investigated. METHODS: LHB tendons were obtained from 18 patients who underwent arthroscopic tenodesis. SWE values were measured preoperatively at 2 sites, proximal to and within the bicipital groove of the LHB tendon. The LHB tendons were detached immediately proximal to the fixed sites and at their superior labrum insertion. Tissue degeneration was histologically quantified using the modified Bonar score. Tendon stiffness was determined using a tensile testing machine. RESULTS: The SWE values of the LHB tendon were 502.1 ± 113.6 kPa proximal to the groove and 439.4 ± 123.3 kPa within the groove. The stiffness was 39.3 ± 19.2 N/mm. The SWE values displayed a moderate positive correlation with the stiffness proximal to the groove (r = 0.80) and within it (r = 0.72). The SWE value of the LHB tendon within the groove showed a moderate negative correlation with the modified Bonar score (r = -0.74). CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that preoperative SWE values of the LHB tendon correlate moderately positively with stiffness and moderately negatively with tissue degeneration. Therefore, SWE may predict LHB tendon tissue degeneration and changes in stiffness caused by tendinopathy.

Arthroscopic biceps tenodesis using press-fit bony plug: a case series study.

PURPOSE: To assess the feasibility, operative time, clinical outcomes, possible complications, and failure rates of all-through arthroscopic biceps tenodesis using press-fit bony plug technique. METHODS: This prospective case series study involved 30 skeletally mature patients with long head of biceps pathology (tendinitis after failure of conservative treatment, subluxation, dislocation, or tendon tears). All patients were followed up for 24 months at least. RESULTS: Twenty-nine patients regained full shoulder and elbow range of motion; one case suffered from reflex sympathetic dystrophy. There was a significant improvement in the constant, ASES, and VAS scores when comparing the pre-operative and post-operative values. The average biceps strength was 96% compared to the opposite healthy side. No cases were complicated by neuro-vascular deficits or failure of the tenodesis. CONCLUSION: Press-fit biceps tenodesis is safe and accessible with low economic demands. We recommend this technique to be used more often when addressing patients with long head of biceps pathologies. REGISTRATION DATA: Registration number: N-1562023. Registration date: June 2022 "Retrospectively registered".

Comparison of Staple, Anchor, and Tenodesis Screw for Posterior Tibialis Tendon Fixation: A Biomechanical Analysis.

Various posterior tibialis tendon fixation techniques are described in literature. Suture anchor, staple and tenodesis screws are widely used for posterior tibialis tendon transfer, but their stiffness and the maximal ultimate failure load were not tested before. We aimed to compare the initial ultimate failure load and stiffnesses of suture anchor, staple and tenodesis screws on bovine tendon fixation to bovine metaphyseal bone. Thirty-five fresh bovine ankle joints and hooves were obtained from a local abattoir. Metatarsals bones with long extensor tendons were harvested. Staple group had 15, suture anchor group had 10, and tenodesis screw group had 10 samples. All fixations were tested with Instron® ElectroPuls® E10000 Test Instrument. Ultimate failure load and failure location were noted. Staple group's median ultimate failure load was 210.03 N (IQR: 133.43), suture anchor group's was 124.33 N (IQR: 63.67), and tenodesis screw group's was 394.46 N (IQR:115.09). Median stiffness of the staple group was 19.87 N/m (IQR: 15.29); the tenodesis screw group's was 20.28 N/m (IQR: 6.18), the anchor group's was 8.54 N/m (IQR: 4.35). Staples' failure occurred on tendon-staple interface, while suture anchors' occurred on anchor-suture interface and tenodesis screws' occurred on tendon-suture interface. Tenodesis screws' ultimate failure load was the highest (tenodesis vs anchor and staple p < .001 and p = .032, respectively). Staple fixation is less expensive than the other methods and can provide sufficient fixation strength but was weaker than the tenodesis screw fixation. Staples are still a good choice for tendon to bone fixation, whereas the suture anchors provide lower fixation strength at a higher cost.

Minimally Invasive Peroneal Tenodesis Assisted by Peroneal Tendoscopy: Technique and Preliminary Results.

Introduction: Peroneal disorders are a common cause of ankle pain and lateral instability and have been described in as much as 77% of patients with lateral ankle instability. Clicking, swelling, pain, and tenderness in the peroneal tendons track are frequent symptoms, but they can be confused with other causes of lateral ankle pain. The management of peroneal disorders can be conservative or surgical. When the conservative treatment fails, surgery is indicated, and open or tendoscopic synovectomy, tubularization, tenodesis or tendon transfers can be performed. The authors present a surgical technique of tendoscopy associated to minimally invasive tenodesis for the treatment of peroneal tendon tears, as well as the preliminary results of patients submitted to this procedure. Methods: Four patients with chronic lateral ankle pain who were diagnosed with peroneal brevis pathology were treated between 2020 and 2022 with tendoscopic-assisted minimally invasive synovectomy and tenodesis. Using a 2.7 mm 30° arthroscope and a 3.0 mm shaver blade, the entire length of the peroneus brevis tendon and most parts of the peroneus longus tendon can be assessed within Sammarco's zones 1 and 2. After the inspection and synovectomy, a minimally invasive tenodesis is performed. Results: All patients were evaluated at least six months after surgery. All of them reported improvement in daily activities and in the Foot Function Index (FFI) questionnaire (pre-surgery mean FFI = 23.86%; post-surgery mean FFI = 6.15%), with no soft tissue complications or sural nerve complaints. Conclusion: The tendoscopy of the peroneal tendons allows the surgeon to assess their integrity, confirm the extent of the lesion, perform synovectomy, prepare the tendon for tenodesis, and perform it in a safe and minimally invasive way, reducing the risks inherent to the open procedure.

Comparison of decrease in elbow flexion strength in patients after tenotomy and tenodesis of the long head of the biceps brachii.

NTRODUCTION: The last two decades have been leading to the development of several types of surgical techniques and procedures to manage the LHB lesions. This paper analyses and compares the difference in muscle strength pre- and post-operatively in two most commonly used surgical procedures - LHB tenotomy and tenodesis. METHOD: The study includes 68 patients who underwent surgery between 2016 and 2020. The patients who had met the prospective study inclusion criteria were divided into two groups based on type of surgery they had undergone (LHB tenotomy or tenodesis); each group consisted of 34. The muscle strength during elbow flexion was measured preoperatively and postoperatively using the Commander Echo Console ultrasound muscle testing device. All patients enrolled in the study had been assessed for elbow flexion strength preoperatively. The muscle strength was measured preoperatively and then 3 years postoperatively (12 to 60 months) on average. CONCLUSION: The study confirmed that the patients who had undergone LHB tenodesis show a significantly lower decrease in elbow flexion strength and a significantly lower incidence of "Popeye" deformity than the patients after LHB tenotomy. Moreover, in the tenodesis group, it was possible to initiate rehabilitation earlier. The incidence of postoperative complications was almost identical in both groups of patients (Tab. 10, Fig. 6, Ref. 40).

The long head of biceps at the shoulder: a scoping review.

BACKGROUND: This review aimed to explore the available literature to update our understanding of the long head of biceps (LHB) at the shoulder. Synthesise our findings to identify emergent themes and knowledge gaps to inform future research and management directions. METHODS: PubMed, Embase, Cinahl, SportDiscus, CENTRAL, and Web of Science were searched from inception to 31st December 2021. Articles were included if they referenced adult participants > 18 years of age and were written in English. RESULTS: 214 articles were included in the final analysis, and results were categorised into six emergent themes: (1) Anatomy - Normal anatomical variation of the biceps from aberrant origins, third and fourth accessory heads, and an absence of the LHB tendon (LHBT) are not necessarily benign, with shoulder pain and instability a commonly reported theme. (2) Function - Bicep's role in glenohumeral elevation and stability in healthy shoulders is minimal. In contrast, LHB has a more significant role in shoulder stability and humeral head depression in subjects with rotator cuff failure or an absent LHBT. (3) Pathology - There is an association between LHB tendinopathy, rotator cuff disease, LHBT instability and occult rotator cuff tears. Early recruitment and hyperactivity of the LHB in subjects with symptomatic rotator cuff tears and instability suggest a potential compensatory role. (4) Assessment - The limited diagnostic utility of special orthopaedic tests in assessing LHBT pathology was a consistent theme. The utility of magnetic resonance imaging and ultrasound to identify full-thickness tendon tears and instability of the LHBT was moderate to high. However, the utility of clinical tests and imaging may be underestimated due to arthroscopy's limitations in fully visualising the proximal LHBT. (5) Non-Surgical Management - Ultrasound-guided injections into the biceps sheath show greater accuracy and patient outcomes than blinded injections; however, the entry of injectate into the intraarticular glenohumeral joint may have unwanted complications. (6) Surgical management - For the surgical management of biceps pathology with or without rotator cuff pathology, both biceps tenodesis and tenotomy report similar improvements in pain without any significant adverse effect on strength or function. Tenodesis favoured higher overall constant scores and a lower incidence of Popeye deformity and cramping arm pain, with tenotomy trending to be more cost and time effective. For patients with a healthy LHBT, rotator cuff repair with adjunctive tenodesis or tenotomy fails to provide additional clinical improvements compared to rotator cuff repair in isolation. CONCLUSIONS: The scoping review highlights the variability of biceps anatomy, which is not necessarily benign and suggests a minimal role of the LHB in shoulder elevation and stability in healthy individuals. In contrast, individuals with rotator cuff tears experience proximal humeral migration and demonstrate hyperactivity of the LHB, suggesting a potential compensation role. The observed prevalence of LHBT pathology with rotator cuff tears is well established; however, the cause-and-effect relationship between LHBT pathology and rotator cuff disease is undetermined. The diagnostic utility of clinical tests and imaging to exclude LHBT pathology may be understated due to the limitations of arthroscopy to visualise the proximal LHBT fully. Rehabilitation programs for the LHB are understudied. Similar post-surgical clinical outcomes are observed for tenodesis and tenotomy for biceps and rotator cuff-related shoulder pain. Subjects undergoing biceps tenodesis are less likely to have cramping arm pain and a Popeye deformity than patients undergoing biceps tenotomy. The significance of routine surgical removal of the LHBT and sequelae on rotator cuff tear progression to failure and long-term shoulder function is unknown, and further research is required. PRE-REGISTRATION: OSF: https://osf.io/erh9m.

Biceps Tenodesis in Patients Age 35 Years and Younger Yields Favorable Clinical Outcomes With Variable Rates of Return to Sport and Complications: A Systematic Review.

PURPOSE: To systematically evaluate reported clinical outcomes, return-to-sport (RTS) rates, and complications following biceps tenodesis in patients aged 35 years and younger and compare outcomes between overhead and nonoverhead athletes. METHODS: A literature search was performed by querying Scopus, EMBASE, and PubMed computerized databases from database inception through August 2022 in accordance with the 2020 Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis guidelines. Studies that evaluated clinical outcomes following biceps tenodesis in patients aged 35 years or younger were included. Study quality was assessed via the Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies criteria. Clinical outcomes, RTS rates, and complications were aggregated. RESULTS: Nine studies from 2011 to 2022 comprising 161 patients (mean age, 25 years; range, 19.7-28.9 years) were included. At an average follow-up of 59 months, postoperative American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score ranged from 81.6 to 96 and the mean visual analog scale score ranged from 0 to 2.1. Mean overall RTS rate ranged from 35% to 100% for the entire patient cohort 35% to 86% among overhead athletes, and 46% to 100% among nonoverhead athletes. Among the overhead athletes, 24 were baseball pitchers. 17% to 100% able to return to sport at any level. Complications were reported in 0% to 19% of patients. 0 to 18% of patients underwent revision surgery. CONCLUSIONS: Biceps tenodesis in patients 35 years of age and younger yields a wide variability in reported RTS rates, excellent clinical outcome scores, and low but variable reported rates of complications, reoperations, and failure. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV; Systematic Review of Level III and IV studies.

The Addition of Either an Anterolateral Ligament Reconstruction or an Iliotibial Band Tenodesis Is Associated With a Lower Failure Rate After Revision Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: A Retrospective Comparative Trial.

PURPOSE: To compare the failure rate in patients who underwent revision anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction alone or associated with an extra-articular procedure. Secondary objectives were to compare ACL laxity, patient-reported outcome measures, and complication rates in these patients and, subsequently, to compare the outcomes of patients who underwent revision ACL reconstruction associated with anatomical anterolateral ligament (ALL) reconstruction or lateral extra-articular tenodesis (LET). METHODS: This was a retrospective comparative study. Patients were classified into 2 groups, according to whether (group 2) or not (group 1) an extra-articular reconstruction was performed. Patients who underwent an extra-articular procedure were further divided into ALL reconstruction (group 2A) and LET (group 2B). Baseline demographic variables, operative data and postoperative data were evaluated. RESULTS: The groups with (86 patients) and without (88 patients) an associated extra-articular reconstruction had similar preoperative data. Group 2 had a lower failure rate (4.6% vs 14.7%; P = .038), better KT-1000, better pivot-shift, and better Lysholm. There was no difference regarding complications, except more lateral pain in group 2. Regarding the groups who underwent ALL reconstruction (41 patients) and LET (46 patients), group 2A showed better Lysholm scores. Both groups had similar failure rates and complications. CONCLUSIONS: Patients who underwent revision ACL reconstruction with a laterally based augmentation procedure had a lower failure rate than patients who underwent isolated revision ACL reconstruction. KT-1000 and pivot-shift examination were also significantly better when a lateral augmentation was performed. Complications were similar except for an increase in lateral pain in the augmented group. No clinically important differences were found when comparing the LET group to the ALL group other than a statistical improvement in the Lysholm functional scale, likely not clinically meaningful, favoring the ALL group and an increased duration of post-operative lateral pain in the LET group. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III, retrospective comparative therapeutic trial.

Combined Lateral Extra-Articular Tenodesis or Combined Anterolateral Ligament Reconstruction and Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Improves Outcomes Compared to Isolated Reconstruction for Anterior Cruciate Ligament Tear: A Network Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

PURPOSE: To conduct a network meta-analysis (NMA) comparing the results of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) among patients who underwent either isolated anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction or combined lateral extra-articular tenodesis (LET) or anterolateral ligament reconstruction (ALLR). METHODS: RCTs that compared isolated ACL reconstruction and combined LET or ALLR were included with minimum 12 months follow-up. Studies that used the double-bundle technique were excluded. Outcome assessment included the number of positive pivot shifts, amount of anterior tibial translation, and International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) subjective, Tegner, and Lysholm scores. Bayesian NMA and the surface under the cumulative ranking area (SUCRA) were evaluated. RESULTS: A total of 1,077 patients from 11 RCTs were enrolled in this study. In NMA, the odds ratios (ORs) of positive pivot shift were significantly lower in ACL + ALLR (OR: 0.17; 95% CI: 0.027-0.67) than isolated ACL reconstruction, but no difference between ACL + ALLR and ACL + LET. There were no significant differences in anterior tibial translation among the techniques, but the IKDC subjective and Lysholm scores of ACL + ALLR and ACL + LET were significantly higher than isolated ACL reconstruction. ACL + ALLR were the most preferred in terms of residual pivot shift, anterior tibial translation, and IKDC subjective scores (SUCRA = 88.2%, 86.4%, and 93.1%, respectively). Additional lateral procedures resulted in significantly lower risk of graft failure (OR: 0.27; 95% CI: 0.1-0.71) than isolated ACL reconstruction. CONCLUSIONS: ACL + ALLR were found to have significantly better outcomes in terms of knee rotational stability and graft failure rate than isolated ACL reconstructions, but the clinical outcomes were uncertain after a minimum 12 months follow-up. Considering the greatest probability of obtaining better knee rotational stability in this NMA, ACL + ALLR was found to be the most preferred technique for patients with ACL injury. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level II, network meta-analysis and systematic review of Level I and II studies.

Anterior Cruciate Ligament Revision Plus Lateral Extra-Articular Procedure Results in Superior Stability and Lower Failure Rates Than Does Isolated Anterior Cruciate Ligament Revision but Shows No Difference in Patient-Reported Outcomes or Return to Sports.

PURPOSE: To determine whether comparative clinical studies demonstrate significant advantages of revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (RACLR) combined with a lateral extra-articular procedure (LEAP), with respect to graft rupture rates, knee stability, return to sport rates, and patient-reported outcome measures, compared with isolated RACLR. METHODS: A systematic review was conducted in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews & Meta-Analyses Guidelines. A PubMed search was conducted using the key words "revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction" combined with any of the following additional terms, "lateral extra-articular tenodesis" OR "anterolateral ligament reconstruction" OR "Lemaire." All relevant comparative clinical studies were included. Key clinical data were extracted and evaluated. RESULTS: Eight comparative studies (seven Level III studies and a one Level IV study) were identified and included. Most studies reported more favorable outcomes with combined procedures with respect to failure rates (0%-13% following RACLR+LEAP, and 4.4%-21.4% following isolated RACLR), postoperative side-to-side anteroposterior laxity difference (1.3-3.9 mm following RACLR+LEAP and 1.8-5.9 mm following isolated RACLR), and high-grade pivot shift (0%-11.1% following RACLR+LEAP and 10.2%-23.8% in patients following isolated RACLR). There were no consistent differences between isolated and combined procedures with respect to return to sport or patient-reported outcome measures. CONCLUSIONS: This systematic review demonstrates that the addition of a LEAP to RACLR was associated with an advantage with respect to ACL graft failure rates and avoidance of high-grade postoperative knee laxity across almost all included studies. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV, Systematic review of level III to IV studies.

Editorial Commentary: Autograft, Early Surgery, 2-Stage Surgery for 1 cm of Tunnel Widening or Greater, and Anterolateral Ligament Reconstruction or Lateral Extra-articular Tenodesis May Improve Outcomes of Anterior Cruciate Ligament Revision Surgery.

Revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) is a challenging procedure. Results are less satisfactory than those of primary ACLR owing to bone defects, altered anatomic landmarks, and concomitant injuries. Modifiable factors such as autograft, early surgery, 2-stage surgery for 1 cm of tunnel widening or greater, and anterolateral ligament reconstruction or lateral extra-articular tenodesis may improve outcomes of anterior cruciate ligament revision surgery. Finally, it is important to consider patients' expectations after revision ACLR when counseling patients and making surgical decisions.