Analysis of technical feasibility and neurovascular safety of endoscopic distal biceps repair: a cadaveric study

Abstract

This cadaveric study was designed to analyze the safety of endoscopic repair of distal biceps tendon (DBT) tears using 2 reattachment techniques. We evaluated the proximity of neurovascular structures to endoscopy portals; iatrogenic injury to neurovascular, musculotendinous, and osseous structures; and changes in compartment pressures. We hypothesized that an all-endoscopic repair of the ruptured DBT would be technically safe and the risk of iatrogenic injury would be low. A 2-portal endoscopic tendon repair was performed in 28 fresh-frozen cadaveric elbows with button devices (with or without interference screws) (n = 17) and suture anchors (n = 11). Dissection was performed, and neurovascular, musculotendinous, and osseous structures were assessed for iatrogenic injury. The repair construct (tendon-tuberosity contact area and implant placement site) was evaluated, and compartment pressures were measured. Statistical analysis was performed to determine significant differences in iatrogenic injury, compartment pressure changes, and tendon-bone contact area between different devices. The lateral cutaneous nerve, cephalic vein, and radial artery were in close proximity to the portals. The button group showed a significantly higher number of iatrogenic injuries than the anchor group (P = .036). All-suture anchor repair showed a significantly higher contact area (mean, 85 mm2) than repairs with all other devices (P < .001). Compartment pressures increased by 2-4 mm in each of the 3 compartments tested (P < .001). Endoscopic DBT repair was technically feasible with both fixation techniques. Button devices were associated with a significantly higher number of iatrogenic injuries. Endoscopic repair with dual suture anchors was safe in cadavers; however, further clinical results are necessary to establish the clinical safety of this technique.