Biceps Tenodesis Procedures Research Articles

Clinical Outcome of an All Arthroscopic 'Whole Layer' Rotator Cuff Repair Technique with Simultaneous Biceps Tenodesis.

To retrospectively evaluate clinical outcomes, including function and pain, of patients after our all arthroscopic "whole layer" rotator cuff repair technique with simultaneous biceps tenodesis procedure; factors influencing results were also evaluated. Given the frequent association of rotator cuff tear with long head of biceps lesion and the need for effective combined treatment strategies, this study aims to evaluate the efficacy of our technique and compare it with established methods. We hypothesized that our technique would significantly improve function and reduce pain in patients with rotator cuff tears and biceps pathology. This is a retrospective study that included patients older than 20 years who underwent all arthroscopic "whole layer" rotator cuff repair technique with simultaneous biceps tenodesis procedures for concomitant rotator cuff tear and long head biceps pathology, from 2016 to 2020. Patients were evaluated preoperatively and at a minimum of 2 years of follow-up using the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) and visual analogue scale (VAS) scores paired t-tests were used for analysis and statistical significance was set at p < 0.05(two-tailed). The satisfaction rate and complications were also evaluated. After an average follow-up of 2.3 years, 118 patients demonstrated significant improvement in both the ASES score (from 36.13 to 95.01, p < 0.001) and VAS score (from 6.81 to 0.89, p < 0.001). Ninety-four percent of the patients reported satisfaction with the surgical outcome. No complications related to Popeye deformity, biceps cramping pain, or ipsilateral shoulder reoperation were observed. Factors such as age, sex, body mass index (BMI), smoking status, alcohol consumption, hypertension, and diabetes did not influence the results. Patients showed significant improvement in both the ASES and VAS scores (p < 0.001). At a mean follow-up time of 2.3 years, the all arthroscopic "whole layer" rotator cuff repair technique with simultaneous biceps tenodesis is a therapeutic and efficient procedure. The procedure revealed a satisfactory functional outcome, reduced pain, and minimal complications and reoperations.

All-Suture Anchor Techniques for Biceps Tenodesis Are Noninferior in End-Cycle Stiffness to an Interference Screw Technique; However, Secondary Outcomes, Such as Ultimate Failure Load, Yield Load, Creep, and Load-to-Failure Stiffness, Are Inferior in an Ovine Model

PurposeThe purpose of this study was to assess the biomechanical performance of two simplified loop and tack biceps tenodesis techniques, all-suture anchor and all-suture anchor with a button, compared to the interference screw technique in an ovine model. MethodsTwenty-one biceps tenodesis procedures were executed on the humeri and flexor digitorum profundus tendons of skeletally mature, female sheep. Limbs were evenly randomized into two experimental groups (all-suture anchor with/without button) and one control group (interference screw). Cyclic loading followed by a load-to-failure test was conducted.The primary outcome metric was end-cycle stiffness, or stiffness measured at the end of cyclic loading, as it modeled the resistance of the construct to the lower-force activities of postoperative physical therapy. Secondary metrics included ultimate failure load (UFL), yield load, creep, and load-to-failure stiffness. End-cycle stiffness difference-of-means testing was conducted with a minimal clinically significant difference (MCID) threshold of -15N/mm (1.5kg/mm). Groups were compared using ANOVA for all recorded variables. ResultsBoth the all-suture anchor and all-suture anchor with button techniques were found to be noninferior in end-cycle stiffness compared to the interference screw technique (-5.2N/mm, 95% CI [-13.6, 3.3] and –3.8N/mm, 95% CI [-12.5, -4.9]) for -15N/mm MCID. The all-suture techniques showed significantly lower UFL, lower yield load, greater creep, and lower load-to-failure stiffness (P<0.001, P<0.001, P=0.002, P<0.001, respectively). Tendon dimensions did not vary significantly across groups. ConclusionsUnder subfailure loading conditions, the all-suture anchor with/without button techniques demonstrated end-cycle stiffness noninferiority with an interference screw technique, however, these techniques were inferior in all secondary outcomes, including significantly lower UFL, lower yield load, greater creep, and lower load-to-failure stiffness. Clinical RelevanceThe all-suture anchor with/without button approaches may retain the natural length-tension dynamics of the long head biceps tendon as fixation can occur before releasing the tendon origin. Additionally, it may offer a simpler and more cost-effective alternative to prevailing arthroscopic methods.

Variations in subpectoral biceps tenodesis locations do not impact clinical outcomes

Biceps tenodesis is a common treatment for pathologies involving the long head of the biceps brachii. Given variations in surgical approach, focus has been placed on the location of the tenodesis to maintain appropriate length-tension relationship. The purpose of this study is to assess for variations in the tunnel placement in subpectoral biceps tenodesis procedures and correlation of tunnel position with patient-reported outcomes. This is a retrospective case series of outcomes as a function of tunnel location with open subpectoralis biceps tenodesis. The location of the biceps tenodesis tunnel was measured on postoperative Grashey radiographs. Correlation between the tenodesis tunnel and postoperative American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) score and Visual Analog Scale (VAS) was assessed. 31 patients were included in the study with an average follow-up of 17 months. The overall tunnel position from the superior edge of the greater tuberosity ranged from 4.20 cm to 12.61 cm, with an average of 7.46 cm. Final ASES score and VAS were 84.5 and 1.2, respectively. There was only weak correlation between both ASES score and tunnel position (r=-0.12) and VAS and tunnel position (r=-0.23). Subpectoralis biceps tenodesis continues to be a viable treatment option for biceps and superior labral pathology. There remains no consensus on tenodesis location, and this study found no significant difference between tunnel location and patient-reported outcomes. Therefore, it is likely that a range of tenodesis locations exists in which favorable clinical results are achieved, explaining the numerous recommendations on tunnel placement.

Subpectoral, Suprapectoral, and Top-of-Groove Biceps Tenodesis Procedures Lead to Similar Good Clinical Outcomes: Comparison of Biceps Tenodesis Procedures

Subpectoral, Suprapectoral, and Top-of-Groove Biceps Tenodesis Procedures Lead to Similar Good Clinical Outcomes: Comparison of Biceps Tenodesis Procedures

Clinical outcomes and return to play in softball players following SLAP repair or biceps tenodesis.

Shoulder pain due to labral tears and biceps tendonitis is commonly found in softball players. Surgical options include labral repair and biceps tenodesis. Although past studies are limited by heterogeneous study groups from multiple sports, this is the first study that assesses clinical outcomes and return to play rates for fast-pitch softball players. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the clinical outcomes and return to play for fast-pitch softball players treated for a superior labrum anterior posterior (SLAP) tear and recalcitrant biceps tendonitis with a biceps tenodesis compared with a traditional SLAP repair. We hypothesized that the biceps tenodesis would have comparable outcomes with a faster return to play compared with SLAP repair. We performed a retrospective analysis on fast-pitch softball players treated surgically for SLAP tear, recalcitrant biceps tendonitis, or a combination between 2001 and 2019 at our institution. Inclusion criteria were fast-pitch softball players who underwent biceps tenodesis or a SLAP repair with greater than 2-year follow-up. Exclusion criteria involved slow-pitch softball players, patients with less than 2-year follow-up, and patients who had undergone concomitant procedures on the ipsilateral shoulder at the time of SLAP repair or biceps tenodesis. Follow-up was either self-reported through OBERD, a patient-reported outcomes (PRO)-managing software, or achieved over the phone. Follow-up data included American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Standardized Shoulder Assessment Form score, Andrews Carson Score, Kerlan-Jobe Orthopaedic Clinic Shoulder and Elbow Score, Numeric Rating Scale for Pain, and our institution-specific return-to-play questionnaire. We statistically compared players who underwent biceps tenodesis or a SLAP repair, and compared pitchers with position players using Student t tests and Fisher exact test with statistical significance determined to be P<.05. From 60 eligible patients identified, follow-up outcome data were successfully captured for 47 (78%). Of the 18 SLAP repair patients, 17 (94%) returned to full competition at an average of 7.9 months. Of the 29 patients who underwent biceps tenodesis, 27 (93%) returned to full competition at an average of 7.1 months. Statistical analysis of PRO scores for each group found no significant differences between any of the measures used to evaluate patient outcomes, including no statistical difference in pitchers compared with position players. In conclusion, this study demonstrated comparable outcomes between SLAP repairs and biceps tenodesis procedures among our study group of fast-pitch softball players. There was no significant difference between RTP times between the 2 groups.

Podium Presentation Title: Clinical Outcomes of Subpectoral, Suprapectoral and Top-of-Groove Biceps Tenodesis Procedures

Podium Presentation Title: Clinical Outcomes of Subpectoral, Suprapectoral and Top-of-Groove Biceps Tenodesis Procedures

Paper 16: Clinical Outcomes and Return to Play in Softball Players Following Biceps Tenodesis or SLAP Repair

Objectives:Shoulder pain due to labral tears and biceps tendon pathology is commonly found in competitive softball players. Surgical options for treatment of these sources of shoulder pain include labral repair and biceps tenodesis. While past studies comparing these two modalities are limited by mostly heterogeneous study groups from multiple sports, this is the first study to our knowledge that assesses clinical outcomes and return to play rates specifically for softball players. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the clinical outcomes and return to play for softball players treated for a SLAP tear and recalcitrant biceps tendonitis with a biceps tenodesis compared with a traditional SLAP repair. We hypothesized that performing a biceps tenodesis in softball players that have recalcitrant biceps tendonitis or a SLAP tear would have comparable outcomes with a faster return to play compared to SLAP repair.Methods:We performed a retrospective analysis on all patients who were active softball players at the time of injury treated surgically for either a SLAP tear, recalcitrant biceps tendonitis or a combination of both between 2001 and 2019. Inclusion criteria for this study included softball players who underwent biceps tenodesis or a SLAP repair at our institution with greater than 2-year follow-up. Exclusion criteria involved patients with less than 2-year follow-up and patients who had undergone concomitant procedures on the ipsilateral shoulder at the time of SLAP repair or biceps tenodesis. Follow-up was either self-reported through OBERD, a PRO-managing software, or achieved over the phone by three authors using four questionnaires: American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES-S), Andrews/Carson KJOC, and our institution-specific VAS visual pain indication and return-to-play questionnaires.Results:After applying the proper inclusion and exclusion criteria, we identified 76 patients who were eligible for this study. From this group of 76 patients, 63 were successfully contacted over the phone or had self-reported outcome scores pulled from our PRO-managing software for a follow-up rate of 83%. The average age for our study group at the time of surgery was 20.6 years and the average post-operative follow-up time was 6.0 years.Of the 76 patients in our study, 34 underwent a biceps tenodesis procedure (45%), 21 underwent a SLAP repair procedure (28%), 6 underwent a combination of both procedures (8%), and 2 underwent a biceps tenotomy (3%).For the 34 patients in our study who underwent biceps tenodesis, the average age at the time of surgery was 20.0 years with a mean follow-up time of 3.7 years. The mean Andrews-Carson score was 82.2 and KJOC score was 73.7 in this group. The mean ASES-S score was 92.0 for the affected shoulder and 97.8 for the unaffected shoulder. The VAS pain indicator score for this group was 1.4 out of 10.The 21 patients in the study who underwent SLAP repair had an average age of 20.9 years at the time of surgery. The average age follow-up time was 8.18 years. This group demonstrated a mean Andrews-Carson score of 86.7 and a KJOC score of 80.7. The mean ASES-S score was 93.3 for the affected shoulder and 96.4 for the unaffected shoulder. The VAS pain indicator score for this group was 1.2 out of 10. Of the 21 SLAP repair patients, 20 (95%) returned to full competition at an average of 7.5 months. Of the 34 patients who underwent biceps tenodesis, 31 (91%) returned to full competition at an average of 7.1 months.Conclusions:In conclusion, this study demonstrated comparable outcomes between SLAP repairs and biceps tenodesis procedures among our study group. Statistical analysis of PRO scores for each group found no significant differences between any of the measures used to evaluate patient outcome post-operatively. There was no significant difference between RTP times between the two groups. Further analysis is needed for additional comparisons, including level of play and position data.

Histopathology of long head of biceps tendon removed during tenodesis demonstrates degenerative histopathology and not inflammatory changes

BackgroundThe aim of this study is to describe and quantitatively analyze the histopathology of proximal long head biceps (LHB) tendinopathy in patients who have undergone LHB tenodesis. The hypothesis is that severe histopathologic changes of the LHB tendon (LHBT) will most likely be reflected with improved postoperative clinical outcomes.MethodsThe study included patients with isolated LHB tendinopathy or LHB tendinopathy associated with concomitant shoulder pathologies. All had failed conservative treatment (12 months) and had a positive pain response (> 50% reduction) pre-operatively after LHB tendon injection with local anesthetic. All underwent biceps tenodesis procedure between 2008 and 2014. Tendon specimens were collected and histologically analyzed with the semi-quantitative Bonar scoring system. Minimum follow-up time was 1 year. A subset of patients was retrospectively reviewed postoperatively and evaluated employing visual analogue score (VAS), short form survey (SF-12), American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeon (ASES) score, Disability of Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) score, and Oxford Shoulder Score (OSS) and postoperative return to work status.ResultsForty-five biceps tendon specimens were obtained from 44 patients (mean age 50 ± 9.6 years). Histopathological analyses demonstrated advanced degenerative changes with myxoid degeneration and marked collagen disorganization. Minimal inflammation was identified. There were no regional differences in histopathological changes. Clinical outcomes did not correlate significantly with severity of histopathologic changes.ConclusionsThis study confirms that LHBT specimens in patients undergoing tenodesis demonstrate with the use of the Bonar score histopathologic changes of chronic degeneration and not inflammation. The correct histopathologic terminology for this process is LHB tendinosis. The histopathological changes appear uniform throughout the entire length of the LHBT which may inform the nature of the procedure performed.

Two-Year Clinical Outcomes and Survivorship After Isolated Biceps Tenodesis

The purpose of this study was to evaluate clinical outcomes and survivorship of isolated biceps tenodesis (BT) at a minimum of 2 years and to identify patient-specific factors associated with these outcomes in patients undergoing BT without concomitant rotator cuff repair (RCR). We hypothesized that patient-reported outcomes would be significantly improved on American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Survey (ASES) and Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (SANE), with a high rate of survivorship (>90%) at 2-year follow-up. A retrospective review of an institutional registry was performed to identify patients who underwent BT from July 2016 to December 2017. Patients >18 years old who underwent an open or arthroscopic BT procedure using an interference screw, button, or anchor for underlying bicipital pathology, without a concomitant RCR or shoulder arthroplasty, and were a minimum of 2 years postoperative were included. Patients were administered ASES and SANE questionnaires preoperatively and at final follow-up. Survivorship was evaluated using Kaplan-Meier analysis. Failure was defined as any patient who underwent reoperation related to the index surgery. A total of 110 patients (mean ± standard deviation age, 48.60 ± 12.14 years) who underwent isolated BT with a follow-up of 24.90 ± 3.95 months were included in analysis. There was a significant improvement in ASES and SANE at final follow-up (P < .001), with 81% to 84% of patients achieving minimal clinically important difference (MCID), 72% to 82% achieving substantial clinical benefit (SCB), and 72% to 80% achieving patient-acceptable symptom state (PASS). Worker's Compensation (WC) patients had a decreased likelihood of achieving PASS on ASES (P= .015) and SANE (P= .012). Four cases were deemed failures (3 revision BTs and 1 capsular debridement) at 15.09 ± 9.57 months. WC did not have a significant effect on likelihood of BT failure. Biceps tenodesis provided significant clinical improvement and high rates of survivorship 2 years postoperatively. WC was associated with a decreased likelihood of achieving PASS. These results support the continued use of isolated BT for treating biceps pathology. IV, case series.

Biceps Tenodesis Demonstrates Lower Reoperation Rates Compared to SLAP Repair for Treatment of SLAP Tears in a Large Cross-Sectional Population

To use a contemporary cross-sectional data set to evaluate trends in surgical treatment for superior labrum anterior and posterior (SLAP) tears and compare surgical outcomes with respect to 2-year revision surgery rates following index SLAP repair versus biceps tenodesis (BT). Patients diagnosed with a SLAP tear between 2010 and 2017 were queried using the Mariner PearlDiver database and stratified by demographic variables and surgical treatment with arthroscopic SLAP repair or arthroscopic/open BT. From 2015 to 2017, Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) and International Classification of Diseases 10th revision (ICD-10) codes were used to track ipsilateral subsequent reoperation within 2-years of index surgery. Between 2010 to 2017, 16.6% of 377,463 patients diagnosed with a SLAP tear underwent surgery (62.3% SLAP repair vs 37.7% BT). 52.4% of BT procedures were arthroscopic (47.6% open). The frequency of SLAP repairs decreased from 74.0% to 46.2% (61%), while the frequency of BTs increased from 26.0% to 53.8% (202%) during the study period. Patients under age 50 were more likely to undergo SLAP repair, and those undergoing BT were more likely to be over 50 with higher CCI and comorbidity risk. 6.3% of 16,186 patients identified with ICD-10 coding required reoperation within 2-years postoperatively. SLAP repair demonstrated a higher revision rate (6.8%; 95% CI, 6.3-7.4%) than BT (5.7%; 95% CI, 5.2-6.2%; P=.0002), (open 5.8% vs arthroscopic BT 5.5%). Arthroscopic debridement, including biceps tenotomy, revision SLAP repair, and revision BT were the most common subsequent procedures. Patients aged 40 to 49 had the highest rate of revision surgery (7.8%). The treatment trend for SLAP tears is changing, with SLAP repair becoming significantly less utilized and BT now becoming the preferred option, especially in patients over 50. Arthroscopic and open BT demonstrated slightly lower risk for reoperation than SLAP repair. IV, cross-sectional study.

High Incidence of Anterior Shoulder Pain in Young Athletes Undergoing Arthroscopic Posterior Labral Repair for Posterior Shoulder Instability

PurposeThe purposes of this study were to determine the incidence of anterior shoulder pain in young athletes undergoing arthroscopic posterior labral repair for symptomatic unidirectional posterior shoulder instability and in patients with preoperative anterior shoulder pain treated without biceps tenodesis at the time of arthroscopic posterior labral repair who underwent a revision biceps tenodesis procedure at short-term follow up.MethodsA retrospective review was performed at a single institution over a 24-month period. The study included young patients who underwent an arthroscopic posterior labral repair for symptomatic unidirectional posterior shoulder instability. The electronic medical record, magnetic resonance arthrograms, and arthroscopic images were reviewed to exclude patients with posterior labral tears with anterior labral tear or SLAP (superior labrum anterior-to-posterior) tear extension on advanced imaging and arthroscopic examination. Data collected included the presence of preoperative tenderness to palpation of the biceps tendon in the groove, the results of a preoperative Speed test, postoperative Subjective Shoulder Value, the presence of postoperative anterior shoulder pain, and the need for a secondary biceps tenodesis.ResultsWe identified 65 patients who underwent arthroscopic labral repair for posterior shoulder instability. From this cohort, 26 patients with symptomatic unidirectional posterior shoulder instability underwent an arthroscopic posterior labral repair. The incidence of preoperative anterior shoulder pain with Zone 2 biceps groove tenderness and a positive Speed test was identified in 20 of 26 patients (76.9%). Of 26 patients, 5 (19%) had concomitant biceps tenodesis. The median postoperative Subjective Shoulder Value was 80 (interquartile range, 60-90) at median follow-up of 2.1 years. Of the 20 patients with preoperative anterior shoulder pain, 8 of 20 (40%) reported persistent anterior pain. One patient (4.7%) underwent a secondary biceps tenodesis.ConclusionsThere is a high incidence of anterior shoulder pain and Zone 2 biceps groove tenderness in patients undergoing isolated arthroscopic posterior labral repair for unidirectional posterior shoulder instability. At short-term follow-up, few patients required a secondary biceps tenodesis procedure; however, 30% of patients had persistent anterior shoulder pain.Level of EvidenceLevel IV, retrospective diagnostic case series.

Early success of the arthroscopic-assisted locked loop suprapectoral biceps tenodesis

There is wide variability in surgical technique for biceps tenodesis. Prior biomechanical studies have demonstrated superior ultimate and fatigue strength with a Krakow-type locked loop when compared with simple suture and lasso-loop configurations; however, this had not yet been clinically studied. The purpose of this study was to assess the short-term results an arthroscopic-assisted locked loop (ALL) suprapectoral biceps tenodesis technique. All patients who underwent an ALL suprapectoral biceps tenodesis by a single surgeon from 2012 and 2019 with a minimum of 12-month follow-up were analyzed. Data collected included demographics, surgical indications, concomitant operative procedures, and postoperative complications of anterior shoulder "groove" pain, "Popeye deformity," biceps muscle cramping pain, and need for revision surgery. Forty patients who underwent an ALL suprapectoral biceps tenodesis met inclusion criteria. Patients were 55.6 ± 8.6 years of age, consisting of 28 men (57%) and 21 women (43%). The median follow-up was 19.3 months. At the latest follow-up, 1 (2%) patient had anterior shoulder "groove" pain, and no patients had a Popeye deformity or biceps muscle cramping. There were no revision biceps tenodesis procedures. The ALL suprapectoral biceps tenodesis technique results in a low incidence of postoperative complications. At a short-term follow-up of 1 year, no patients had reoperations or revisions for failed biceps tenodesis. Groove pain was nearly absent in this series of patients.

Ultrasound-Guided Suprapectoral Tenodesis of the Long Head of the Biceps Brachii

When the long head of the biceps tendon is diseased, tenodesis is an appropriate treatment strategy. The specific technique used is dependent on visualization, fixation method and hardware, and tenodesis location. For suprapectoral tenodesis techniques, those that fix the tendon within or below the bicipital groove can be challenging owing to the transverse humeral ligament covering the groove. To accurately identify the biceps tendon in this area, the ligament often requires resection. Ultrasound provides surgeons with a safe and noninvasive tool to visualize the biceps tendon as it exits the bicipital groove, negating the need for unroofing and other pitfalls associated with traditional techniques. This technical note describes an ultrasound-guided suprapectoral biceps tenodesis procedure.

The All-Inside Arthroscopic Loop Tenodesis Procedure to Treat Long Head of Biceps Tendon Pathologies

A variety of techniques are available to treat pathologies of the long head of the biceps tendon. Next to a simple tenotomy and different tenodesis techniques, the loop tenodesis procedure was recently introduced. This technique represents an arthroscopically assisted surgical method for the treatment of biceps tendon disease. This procedure is based on an enlargement of the proximal tenotomized tendon to create a stable fixed tendon without foreign material to prevent distalization of the biceps muscle. This article describes an all-inside arthroscopic loop tenodesis procedure. By use of a special stitch configuration, the long head of the biceps tendon loop can be created in an all-arthroscopic manner, resulting in a stable fixed tendon at the entrance to the bicipital groove (autotenodesis). No foreign materials and only 2 arthroscopic portals are necessary for this biceps tenodesis procedure.

Low incidence of failure after proximal biceps tenodesis with unicortical suture button

PurposeRecent interest in suture button fixation has developed with regard to proximal biceps tenodesis fixation. Biomechanical studies have demonstrated viability of a unicortical suture button technique in vitro. Despite this, no clinical data has been reported to validate the biomechanical data. The purpose of this study is to report on complication and failure rates in the early postoperative period after bicep tenodesis with a unicortical suture button. MethodsA retrospective review was performed of all biceps tenodesis performed at our institution over a 36-month period using a unicortical suture button for fixation. All included patients had a minimum 12 weeks follow up. Failures were defined as complete loss of fixation, change in biceps contour during the early postoperative period, acute pain at the tenodesis site, or acute loss of supination strength. Results145 of 166 biceps tenodesis procedures performed by the 4 surgeons at our institution met inclusion criteria. 80.1% of the patients were active duty military at the time of surgery. The average age was 38.2 years. There were 7 total complications (4.8%), including one failure (0.7%) requiring revision. ConclusionFailure and complication rates in the early postoperative period using a unicortical suture button for biceps tenodesis fixation are consistent with other reported techniques. This study adds clinical data to the existing biomechanical reports that this technique is strong enough to provide stable fixation of the biceps tendon to allow healing of the tendon to the humerus.

Demographic trends in arthroscopic and open biceps tenodesis across the United States

The purpose of this study was to evaluate trends in procedures and to report on demographic data of patients undergoing arthroscopic vs. open biceps tenodesis. A retrospective review of a commercially available database (PearlDiver) was conducted to identify cases of arthroscopic and open biceps tenodesis performed between 2007 and 2011 with concurrent diagnoses of commonly associated shoulder disorders. Each record provided the patient's age, gender, and region within the United States, and statistical significance was determined with respect to each of these demographics. There were 9011 patients who underwent arthroscopic biceps tenodesis and 11,678 patients who underwent open biceps tenodesis between 2007 and 2011. The number of biceps tenodesis cases increased from 2007 to 2011 (2047 to 5832; P=.015). Both arthroscopic and open biceps tenodesis procedures were performed most commonly in the 30- to 59-year-old age group (76.3% and 76.1%; P<.00001). Men underwent arthroscopic or open biceps tenodesis more commonly than women did (66.1% and 71.9%; P<.00001). Rates of both open and arthroscopic biceps tenodesis varied significantly among the Midwest, South, Northeast, and West regions (P=.009; P=.007); 49.8% of arthroscopic and 44.6% of open biceps tenodesis cases were associated with rotator cuff tears, whereas 14.4% of arthroscopic and 16.2% of open cases were associated with biceps tendon disorders. Both arthroscopic and open biceps tenodesis cases increased annually from 2007 to 2011. Themajority of biceps tenodesis cases were performed in men aged 30 to 59 years, and the South had the highest overall number of cases. Further studies are required to evaluate the efficacy of these procedures with and without concomitant pathologic processes.

Trends in Long Head Biceps Tenodesis

Background: Tenodesis of the long head of the biceps tendon has become a popular surgical treatment option for patients with pain or instability attributed to a diseased or unstable biceps tendon. No previous studies have characterized the practice patterns of surgeons performing biceps tenodesis in the United States. Purpose: To investigate current trends in both arthroscopic and open biceps tenodesis across time, sex, age, and region of the United States as well as associated charges. Study Design: Descriptive epidemiology study. Methods: Patients who underwent biceps tenodesis (Current Procedural Terminology [CPT] codes 23430 and 29828) for the years 2008 through 2011 were identified using the PearlDiver Patient Record Database, including both private-payer and Medicare data. These cohorts were then assessed for associated diagnoses using International Classification of Diseases, 9th Revision, codes and concomitant procedures using CPT codes. These searches yielded procedural volumes, sex and age distribution, regional volumes, and average per-patient charges. A χ2 linear-by-linear association analysis, Student t test, and linear regression were used for comparisons, with P < .05 considered significant. Results: A total of 44,932 biceps tenodesis procedures were identified from 2008-2011. The incidence of biceps tenodesis procedures per 100,000 database patients increased 1.7-fold over the study period, from 8178 in 2008 to 14,014 in 2011 (P < .0001). An increase in the overall percentage volume was noted in patients aged 60-69 years (P = .039) and 20-29 years (P = .016). The overall charges for arthroscopic tenodesis increased at a rate significantly greater than that of open tenodesis (P < .0001). Rotator cuff tear or sprain, bicipital tenosynovitis, biceps tendon rupture, superior labral lesion, and osteoarthritis were the most common diagnoses associated with biceps tenodesis procedures. A significant increase in isolated biceps tenodesis was also observed over the study period, from 1967 patients in 2008 to 3565 patients in 2011, representing a 1.8-fold increase. Conclusion: The incidence of biceps tenodesis has increased yearly from 2008-2011. Arthroscopic tenodesis has emerged as a more popular technique. Charges associated with the procedure have increased significantly. Significant regional variations in procedural incidences exist.

Subpectoral Biceps Tenodesis for the Treatment of Type II and IV Superior Labral Anterior and Posterior Lesions

Background: Surgical repair remains the gold standard for most type II and type IV superior labral anterior and posterior (SLAP) lesions that fail nonoperative management. However, most recently, there have been data demonstrating unacceptably high failure rates with primary repair of type II SLAP lesions. Biceps tenodesis may offer an acceptable, if not better, alternative to primary repair of SLAP lesions. Hypothesis: Subpectoral biceps tenodesis provides satisfactory, reproducible outcomes for the treatment of type II and type IV SLAP lesions. Study Design: Case series; Level of evidence, 4. Methods: Patients who underwent subpectoral biceps tenodesis and labral debridement for type II and type IV SLAP lesions by a single board-certified shoulder surgeon from 2006 to 2012 were evaluated. Exclusion criteria included those patients who underwent biceps tenodesis with an associated rotator cuff repair, anterior labral repair, or posterior labral repair. Outcome measures included the visual analog scale (VAS) for pain, the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) score, and demographic data. Results: Between 2006 and 2012, a total of 36 subpectoral biceps tenodesis procedures were performed in 33 patients for type II or IV SLAP lesions. Twenty-six patients with 29 shoulder surgeries were available for follow-up. The average age was 46.7 years, with 16 male and 10 female patients participating in the study. The average follow-up was 40.17 months. There was a significant improvement in ASES and VAS scores: 48.1 and 6.4 preoperatively compared with 87.5 and 1.5 postoperatively, respectively (P < .001). There was no significant difference based on SLAP lesion type, patient age, or patient sex. Of 29 shoulders, 26 (89.66%) were able to return to the previous level of activity. Conclusion: This study adds to the evolving literature supporting biceps tenodesis as a viable treatment for type II and IV SLAP lesions. Patient age had no effect on the outcomes. Based on these results, biceps tenodesis is a safe, effective, and technically straightforward alternative to primary SLAP repair in patients with type II and IV SLAP tears.

Biomechanical strain characteristics of soft tissue biceps tenodesis and bony tenodesis

BackgroundBiomechanical analysis of biceps tenodesis procedures has historically focused on load to failure models. Minimal data exists for the analysis of biomechanical strain properties of the biceps tendon in a sub-failure, physiologic cadaver model. HypothesisTendon strain characteristics are different between bony and soft tissue tenodesis surgery, and the soft tissue tenodesis procedure reproduces a strain pattern more similar to the native biceps tendon. MethodsEight fresh frozen cadaver upper extremities were mounted onto a custom device that controls shoulder abduction and rotation. Strain on the tendon was measured using a differential variable reluctance transducer as the arm was moved through cycles of abduction and external rotation. Each arm was mounted once, and all 3 testing procedures were performed on each of the 8 specimens. Statistical analysis was completed using ANOVA, followed by multiple comparisons with Bonferroni correction. ResultsThe bony tenodesis model placed higher strain on the biceps tendon than the soft tissue tenodesis (p=0.025). Also, the bony tenodesis model increased the strain on the biceps tendon when compared to the native tendon (p=0.031). In contrast, the soft tissue tenodesis did not significantly alter strain when compared to the native tendon (p=0.089). ConclusionThe soft tissue tenodesis procedure better maintained the native strain environment when compared to the bony tenodesis using an interference screw. Due to this closer approximation of native biceps tendon biomechanics, the soft tissue procedure may be more preferable clinically than the bony tenodesis.Level of Evidence: 1, Controlled Laboratory Study.

Demographic Trends in Arthroscopic and Open Biceps Tenodesis in New York State

Objectives:Tenodesis of the long head of the biceps is one of many options to reduce pain caused by proximal long head insertional tendinopathy, tendon instability, or part of a superior labrum anterior-posterior lesion. This technique can be performed either as an open or arthroscopic procedure. The purpose of this study is to compare the relative incidence and demographics of patients who underwent either an arthroscopy or open biceps tenodesis procedure in New York State from 2002-2010.Methods:Retrospective review of patients who underwent open or arthroscopic biceps tenodesis surgery were identified from the New York State Statewide Planning and Research Commission (SPARCS) ambulatory surgery database, which includes all outpatient surgeries performed at hospitals, outpatient surgical centers, and rural clinics in New York State. Cases of open and arthroscopic biceps tenodesis were identified by unique Current Procedural Terminology codes (23430, 29828). Data from 2002 to 2010 were available for open procedures and from 2008 to 2010 for arthroscopic procedures. Chi-square test and student’s t-test were used to analyze the data. Variables measured included incidence, age, gender, race, ethnicity, type of operating facility, and primary payor.Results:From 2002 to 2010 the incidence of biceps tenodesis rose over 600%. From 2008 to 2010 there were 2672 open biceps tenodesis procedures and 3289 arthroscopic biceps tenodesis procedures performed in New York State. The arthroscopic group contained significantly more women (33%) than the open group (25%, P<.0001). The average age arthroscopic patients was slightly higher (55.33 years) than that of open patients (54.45 years, P<.01). There was a significantly greater proportion of African- American patients in the arthroscopic group. Patients undergoing arthroscopic surgery were more likely to be treated at a hospital as opposed to a free standing clinic. The most common primary payor for open cases was worker’s compensation at 22% of all cases. Of arthroscopic patients, 18% listed worker’s compensation as the primary payor. Medicare patients accounted for 16% of open cases and 19% of arthroscopic patients (P<.001).Conclusion:Incidence of biceps tenodesis surgery has increased steadily from 2002 to 2010. There were 23% more arthroscopic procedures performed in 2010 than there were in 2008. Arthroscopic patients are more likely to be older, female, and African American. Arthroscopic biceps tenodeis, which require additional skill and training, were more likely to be performed in a hospital setting.