Post-operative Complications Following Distal Biceps Tendon Repairs: A Prospective Study

Matzon, Jonas L.; Penna, Sreeram; Martin, Dennis P.; Beredjiklian, Pedro K.

doi:10.1016/j.jhsa.2017.06.093

Cited by 1 publication

(1 citation statement)

References 3 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…14 This may explain the rate at the higher end of that described by other papers. 9,14,17 There were no reported posterior interosseous nerve injuries.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 96%

Mid-term clinical and functional outcomes of distal biceps tendon repair: A comparative study of two surgical fixation techniques

Poyser

Abdul

Mehta

2020

Journal of Orthopaedics, Trauma and Rehabilitation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: Acute rupture of the distal biceps tendon is relatively uncommon, and surgical repair is advocated for acute injuries to restore strength and function. Numerous techniques are described in the literature, with no true consensus regarding the optimal method of fixation. The aim of this study was to evaluate patient-reported outcome measures, clinical outcomes and complications for patients undergoing distal biceps tendon repair using two fixation techniques: cortical button and suture anchor. Methods: A retrospective single-unit case series of 51 cases (50 patients) underwent distal biceps tendon repair, comprising 19 cortical button and 32 suture anchor fixations. Patients were assessed using the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) questionnaire and overall satisfaction. Clinical outcomes and complications were reviewed from patient records. Results: Thirty-eight (76.5%) patients responded to DASH questionnaires with a mean follow-up of 189 weeks (11.5–425 weeks). Mean DASH scores for cortical button and suture anchor groups were 6.2 (0–30.8) and 3.3 (0–16.7), respectively ( p = 0.21). Eight patients (16%) reported lateral cutaneous neuropraxia in the early post-operative period. All but two of these patients experienced complete resolution at the final follow-up. One patient had heterotrophic ossification, which did not require any further intervention. There was one re-rupture (suture anchor), but the patient declined further surgical intervention. Conclusion: There were no statistically significant differences in the patient-reported outcome measures, overall satisfaction and complication rate between patients undergoing either method of fixation. Level of evidence: III

show abstract

“…14 This may explain the rate at the higher end of that described by other papers. 9,14,17 There were no reported posterior interosseous nerve injuries.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 96%