4.5 Article

The influence of suprapectoral arthroscopic biceps tenodesis for isolated biceps lesions on elbow flexion force and clinical outcomes

Journal

KNEE SURGERY SPORTS TRAUMATOLOGY ARTHROSCOPY
Volume 25, Issue 10, Pages 3220-3228

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00167-015-3846-7

Keywords

Shoulder; Biceps tenodesis; Interference screw; SLAP; Biceps pulley; Elbow flexion force

Ask authors/readers for more resources

To prospectively evaluate elbow flexion force, cosmetic and clinical outcome of all-arthroscopic suprapectoral biceps tenodesis for isolated biceps lesions. Tenodesis was performed using a 6.25-mm absorbable interference screw for intraosseous fixation. Seventeen out of 24 patients (70.8 %, median age 49.0 +/- 10.1 years; 10 = male) could be included for 24 months follow-up. Elbow flexion strength in 10A degrees and 90A degrees elbow flexion, the upward-directed force of the upper arm in the O'Brien position, objective evaluation of a Popeye-sign deformity and validated clinical scores (CMS, SST, ASES) were assessed preoperatively, 3, 6, 12 and 24 months postoperatively. Elbow flexion strength in 90A degrees improved significantly from 12 months onwards (P = 0.001) without significant difference to the contralateral arm from 3 months postoperatively (n.s.). At 24 months, an average increase of 46.4 % (median 37.7 %) from preoperative could be seen. The dominant arm was affected in 70.6 %. All scores showed a significant improvement 3 months postoperatively: SST (P = 0.003), ASES (P = 0.006) and total CMS (P < 0.001). Three patients (17.6 %) developed a distalization of the maximum biceps circumference of more than 20 % compared to preoperative. All-arthroscopic proximal suprapectoral intraosseous single-limb biceps tenodesis for the treatment of isolated biceps lesions provides good-to-excellent clinical results with significant improvement of elbow flexion strength and clinical scores and no significant difference to the unaffected contralateral arm. IV.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available