Objectives: Pathology of the long head of the biceps tendon is a recognized source of shoulder pain in adults that can be treated with tenotomy or tenodesis when non-operative measures are not effective. It is not clear whether arthroscopic or open biceps tenodesis has a clinical advantage. To date, we are not aware of any studies that directly compare clinical outcomes between an arthroscopic and an open technique for tenodesis of the long head of the biceps brachii. The purpose of this study was to determine whether a difference in outcomes and complications exists between matched cohorts after biceps tenodesis utilizing an open subpectoral versus an allarthroscopic suprapectoral technique. Methods: A prospective database was reviewed for patients undergoing an all-arthroscopic suprapectoral or open subpectoral biceps tenodesis. Adult patients with a minimum 18-month follow-up were included. Patients undergoing a concomitant rotator cuff or labral repair were excluded. The groups were matched to age within 3 years, sex, and time to follow-up within 3 months. Pain improvement, development of a popeye deformity, muscle cramping, post-operative ASES scores, satisfaction scores, and complications were evaluated. Results: Forty-six patients (23 all-arthroscopic, 23 open) patients with an average age of 57.2 years (range, 45-70) were evaluated at a mean 28.7 months (range, 18-42) follow-up. No patients in either group developed a popeye deformity or complained of arm cramping. There was no significant difference in mean ASES scores between the open and all-arthroscopic groups (92.7 vs. 88.9, P = 0.42, Table 1). Similarly, there was no significant difference between patient satisfaction scores (8.9 vs. 9.1, P = 0.73). Eighteen patients (78.3%) in the arthroscopic cohort and sixteen patients (69.6%) in the open cohort fully returned to athletic activity (P = 0.50). There were no complications in the all-arthroscopic group. There were two complications in the open group (superficial incisional erythema, and brachial plexopathy) that resolved by final follow-up. Conclusion: Biceps tenodesis is a reliable treatment option for pathology of the long head of the biceps that may avoid arm cramping and a cosmetic "popeye" deformity that can occur following tenotomy. Open subpectoral and all-arthroscopic suprapectoral are two commonly used techniques to reattach the biceps tendon distal to the bicipital groove. In this study, patients undergoing an all-arthroscopic tenodesis experienced similar pain relief, shoulder function, and return to athletic activity as patients undergoing an open tenodesis. An open subpectoral technique may increase the risk of complications secondary to a larger incision and increased surgical dissection. Larger studies with longer follow-up would help delineate the long-term effects and potential differences between an allarthroscopic suprapectoral and open subpectoral biceps tenodesis.

No abstract

Proximal hamstring injuries can be disabling, and several traditional conservative treatments, including physiotherapy and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, have been inconsistent. Corticosteroid injections have demonstrated success but can adversely affect local tissues. Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) has emerged as a safe, effective treatment for several orthopedic pathologies. The authors propose a PRP injection at the muscle origin as a novel treatment for proximal hamstring injuries. A retrospective review yielded 15 patients with 17 proximal hamstring injuries. Twelve injuries failed traditional conservative treatment and were ultimately treated with a PRP injection at the hamstrings muscle origin. Five patients were treated with traditional conservative treatment alone. Analysis included pre- and posttreatment visual analog scale scores, Nirschl Phase Rating Scale scores, and return to sport. No significant difference existed between the groups' pretreatment visual analog scale scores (P=.28) and Nirschl Phase Rating Scale scores (P=.15) and their posttreatment visual analog scale scores (P=.38) and Nirschl Phase Rating Scale scores (P=.22). The PRP group demonstrated a reduction in visual analog scale scores (P<.01) and Nirschl Phase Rating Scale scores (P<.01), but the traditional conservative treatment group did not demonstrate the same reduction (P=.06 and .06, respectively). All athletes returned to their desired activity level with no major complications.

No abstract

Autologous platelet-rich plasma (PRP) therapies have seen a dramatic increase in breadth and frequency of use for orthopaedic conditions in the past 5 years. Rich in many growth factors that have important implications in healing, PRP can potentially regenerate tissue via multiple mechanisms. Proposed clinical and surgical applications include spinal fusion, chondropathy, knee osteoarthritis, tendinopathy, acute and chronic soft-tissue injuries, enhancement of healing after ligament reconstruction, and muscle strains. However, for many conditions, there is limited reliable clinical evidence to guide the use of PRP. Furthermore, classification systems and identification of differences among products are needed to understand the implications of variability.