Bridge Tenodesis: A Secure Fixation Technique for Biceps Long Head Tendinopathy During Arthroscopic Rotator Cuff Repair Using a Suture-Bridge Technique

Park, Jin-Young; Lee, Jae-Hyung; Oh, Kyung-Soo; Chung, Seok-Won; Bang, Jin-Young; Noh, Youngmin

doi:10.1016/j.eats.2016.05.011

Cited by 7 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…It has been reported that LHBT tenotomy and LHBT tenodesis achieve satisfactory efficacy. As compared with LHBT tenodesis, pure LHBT tenotomy has the advantages of simplicity, short surgery time and rapid post-operative recovery (21,32,33), but it may cause complications including Popeye sign deformity (21,24,25,28), upper arm spastic pain, loss of stability of the humeral head (34)(35)(36) and reduced forearm supination strength (20,22,23). LHBT tenodesis is a more invasive surgical procedure, but it maintains the length and tension of the original tendon and the strength of the elbow muscle, effectively prevents muscle atrophy and minimizes spastic and Popeye sign deformity in the upper arm (37,38).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Small‑incision open distal subpectoral vs. arthroscopic proximal biceps tenodesis for biceps long head tendon lesions with repair of rotator cuff tears

Yang

Zhang

et al. 2019

Exp Ther Med

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The curative effect of small-incision open distal subpectoral vs. arthroscopic proximal biceps tenodesis for lesions in the long head of the biceps tendon (LHBT) combined with rotator cuff repairs (RCR) has remained controversial. The aim of the present study was to compare the two surgical methods. A total of 71 patients who received surgical treatment for LHBT lesions accompanied by RC tears were analyzed. Following arthroscopic RCR and tendectomy of the affected LHBT, 35 patients underwent small-incision open distal subpectoral tenodesis through a small incision (the subpectoral group), while the remaining 36 patients received arthroscopic proximal tenodesis (the arthroscopic group). The surgery time and intra-operative blood loss were compared between the two groups. In addition, the clinical outcomes were evaluated using scoring systems for the functional assessment of the shoulder joint. The subpectoral group had a shorter surgery time and less intra-operative blood loss than the arthroscopic group (P<0.05). The functional scores of the two groups significantly improved as time passed (P<0.05). The subpectoral group was significantly superior to the arthroscopic group with regard to the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score at 2 weeks post-operatively and visual analog scale score at 2 weeks and 3 months post-operatively (P<0.05). Small-incision open distal subpectoral and arthroscopic proximal tenodesis were demonstrated to effectively improve the function of the shoulder joint and relieve pain caused by LHBT lesions accompanied by RCR. However, small-incision open distal subpectoral tenodesis had the additional advantage of shorter surgery time, less intra-operative bleeding and encouraging early results compared to arthroscopic proximal tenodesis. The study was registered as a clinical trial in the Chinese Trial Registry (no. ChiCTR1800015643).

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Small‑incision open distal subpectoral vs. arthroscopic proximal biceps tenodesis for biceps long head tendon lesions with repair of rotator cuff tears

Yang

Zhang

et al. 2019

Exp Ther Med

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For example, keyhole xation may fail due to low primary stability [34], knot pullout [35], and excess tension [36]. The interference screw technique may lead to screw loosening [37] and tendon concis [32] because of proximal cancellous bone and tendon-bone extrusion [32], and the length-tension relationship is di cult to control with this technique [38,39]. The traditional single anchor xation technique may not offer adequate stabilization of the tendon, and the construct strength may be poor.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Modified Arthroscopic Double-Row Technique for Isolated Biceps Tenodesis

Li¹,

Tao²

2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundDue to certain complications with single anchor fixation reported in the literature, we proposed a modified double-row technique for arthroscopic biceps tenodesis.MethodsFrom June 2014 to January 2018, 42 patients with isolated lesions of the long head of the biceps tendon were treated with an arthroscopic modified double-row technique. The Constant-Murley shoulder score, University of California Los Angeles shoulder score, and visual analogue scale score were evaluated preoperatively and postoperatively.ResultsAll patients were followed up for an average of 28.6 months. The mean Constant-Murley shoulder score, University of California Los Angeles shoulder score, and visual analogue scale score were significantly improved from 52.6, 12.8, and 6.4 preoperatively to 94.3, 33.1, and 0.6 at the last follow-up, respectively (P<0.001 for all). There was no postoperative incidence of persist bicipital groove pain or Popeye sign reported.ConclusionArthroscopic tenodesis with a modified double-row technique could achieve satisfactory efficacy in the treatment of lesions of the long head of the biceps tendon. This method could be an alternative and reliable option for the treatment of the long head of the biceps tendon lesion.

show abstract

“…Clinical outcomes, cosmesis, and structural integrity appear to be greater with bony suture anchor fixation 29 . Park et al 24 recently described a technique of combined bony and soft tissue tenodesis by suturing the tendon to the rotator interval in addition to placing a separate suprapectoral suture anchor in the bicipital groove. Lee et al 15 reported decreased pain and increased ASES and Constant scores in 84 patients undergoing suture anchor tenodesis in the bicipital groove in the setting of RCR.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Case-control comparison of “in-the-groove” and lateral-row arthroscopic biceps tenodesis with concomitant rotator cuff repair

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Lateral-row (LR) arthroscopic biceps tenodesis (BT) has been described as a technique using an LR rotator cuff repair (RCR) anchor for biceps fixation. This technique has not been compared with other BT techniques. The purpose of this study was to compare the clinical outcomes of patients undergoing a suprapectoral "in-the-groove" arthroscopic BT and patients treated with an LR tenodesis performed in conjunction with arthroscopic RCR. Methods: Patients undergoing arthroscopic BT in the setting of an arthroscopic RCR were evaluated preoperatively and at a minimum of 12 months' follow-up. Patients who underwent an in-the-groove BT were matched 1:1 to patients who underwent an LR BT based on age at surgery and size of the rotator cuff tear using the Patte classification. Comparisons made included age, sex, body mass index, patientreported outcome measures, range of motion, and patient satisfaction. Results: There were 82 patients (41 in each group) who met the inclusion criteria, with an average follow-up period of 33 months and average age of 61 years. By use of the Patte classification, there were 20 matched pairs with stage 1 tears, 11 matched pairs with stage 2 tears, and 10 matched pairs with stage 3 tears. Comparisons of the 2 cohorts revealed no differences in preoperative or postoperative motion, patient-reported outcome measures, or patient satisfaction. Furthermore, no differences were found in overall improvements in motion or outcome measures, as well as overall satisfaction. Conclusions: Patients undergoing simultaneous RCR and BT demonstrate similar patient-reported and objective outcomes for both LR tenodesis and in-the-groove tenodesis techniques.

show abstract

Bridge Tenodesis: A Secure Fixation Technique for Biceps Long Head Tendinopathy During Arthroscopic Rotator Cuff Repair Using a Suture-Bridge Technique

Cited by 7 publications

References 9 publications

Small‑incision open distal subpectoral vs. arthroscopic proximal biceps tenodesis for biceps long head tendon lesions with repair of rotator cuff tears

Small‑incision open distal subpectoral vs. arthroscopic proximal biceps tenodesis for biceps long head tendon lesions with repair of rotator cuff tears

Modified Arthroscopic Double-Row Technique for Isolated Biceps Tenodesis

Case-control comparison of “in-the-groove” and lateral-row arthroscopic biceps tenodesis with concomitant rotator cuff repair

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About