Superior Labrum Anterior Posterior Repair Research Articles

Current Evidence Based Recommendations on Rehabilitation following Arthroscopic Shoulder Surgery: Rotator Cuff, Instability, Superior Labral Pathology, and Adhesive Capsulitis.

Arthroscopy has become increasingly popular for a addressing a wide variety of shoulder pathology. However, despite increasing interest, there is still much uncertainty and variability amongst providers regarding optimal post-operative rehabilitation. This review provides an overview of the evidence underlying common rehab protocols used following arthroscopic interventions for rotator cuff disease, shoulder instability, superior labral anterior to posterior (SLAP) tears and adhesive capsulitis. For small and medium sized rotator cuff tears, early motion protocols do not seem to affect healing or retear rates, however there is no difference with regards to long term functional outcomes when compared to standard motion protocols. For larger tears (> 3cm), early active motion may be associated with impaired tendon integrity. Early range of motion following arthroscopic Bankart repair has not been shown to increase rate of recurrence, however the data on return to sport requires more granularity to effectively guide care. Further research needs to be done to compare rehab protocols following SLAP repair and arthroscopic capsular release. Rehabilitation protocols following rotator cuff surgery and anterior shoulder stabilization have garnered the most research interest. However, there is still a need for larger higher-level studies examining the long-term effects of different rehab protocols. Regarding the arthroscopic management of other types of shoulder instability, SLAP tears and adhesive capsulitis, there is paucity of high-quality evidence. This knowledge gap likely underpins the variability in different rehab protocols seen in clinical practice, highlighting the need for more research.

Superior labrum anterior to posterior (SLAP) repair is associated with increased rate of subsequent rotator cuff diagnoses and revision surgery: a propensity-matched comparison

Surgical management of superior labral anterior to posterior (SLAP) tears remains controversial. Current management utilizes 2 well-established procedures: biceps tenodesis and SLAP repair. This study evaluates the complications associated with arthroscopic SLAP repair vs. an open or arthroscopic biceps tenodesis to further elucidate optimal surgical management. In this retrospective cohort study, the TriNetX database was utilized to evaluate patients who underwent repair of SLAP lesions (International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision code: S43.43) from May 15, 2003, to May 15, 2023. Three patient cohorts were evaluated: those who underwent arthroscopic SLAP repair (Current Procedural Terminology [CPT] code: 29807), those who underwent arthroscopic biceps tenodesis (CPT code: 29828), and those who underwent open tenodesis of the biceps (CPT code: 23430). Cohorts were propensity matched for type 2 diabetes, nicotine dependence, alcohol-related disorders, body mass index, and demographic factors such as age at event, ethnicity, race, and sex. The outcomes evaluated were disruption of surgical wound, deep vein thrombosis, mononeuropathy of upper limb, shoulder contusion, humeral fracture, sepsis, deceased, acute postoperative pain, revision, shoulder stiffness, and rotator cuff strain. All outcomes were evaluated within 1 year postprocedure. A total of 11,081 arthroscopic SLAP repairs, 9960 arthroscopic biceps tenodesis, and 9420 open biceps tenodesis were matched. Compared with patients who underwent arthroscopic biceps tenodesis, those who underwent arthroscopic SLAP repair were 1.8 times more likely to undergo revision (2.9% vs. 1.6%, P<.0001). Compared with those who underwent open biceps tenodesis, patients who had SLAP repair performed were 1.4 times more likely to undergo revision (3.1% vs. 2.3%, P=.013) and 1.6 times more likely to have a subsequent rotator cuff strain diagnosis (5.1% vs. 3.2%, P=.0002). Compared with patients who underwent SLAP repair, those who underwent arthroscopic biceps tenodesis exhibited 1.3 times more instances of acute postoperative pain (5.2% vs. 4.0%, P=.011). Similarly, open biceps tenodesis exhibited 1.8 times more instances of acute postoperative pain (6.9% vs. 3.8%, P<.0001) and 1.3 times more shoulder stiffness (11.8% vs. 9.0%, P<.0001). In the last 20 years, patients who underwent SLAP repair were associated with higher risk of revision surgery and subsequent rotator cuff strain diagnosis. Conversely, patients who underwent biceps tenodesis were associated with higher rates of acute postoperative pain and shoulder stiffness.

Biceps Rerouting Regardless of a Biceps-Labral Lesion During Rotator Cuff Repair Results in Lower Retear Rates and Comparable Clinical Outcomes to Subpectoral Biceps Tenodesis

PurposeTo evaluate the radiographic and clinical outcomes when rerouting a pathologic biceps during arthroscopic rotator cuff repair, by comparing it with concomitant subpectoral biceps tenodesis. MethodsThis retrospective, historical cohort study was conducted with patients who underwent an arthroscopic repair of a full-thickness rotator cuff tear, with intraoperative confirmation of biceps pathology including partial tears, subluxation, pulley lesions, or type II superior labrum anterior to posterior (SLAP) lesions. Until May 2018, such patients were treated with concomitant subpectoral tenodesis (group SPBT). Afterward, biceps rerouting was done regardless of biceps pathology (group BR) without biceps or SLAP repair. Radiographic parameters, including fatty degeneration, acromiohumeral distance, Sugaya classification, and retears, were evaluated using preoperative and one-year postoperative MRI. Clinical evaluation with a minimum two-year follow-up included pain visual analogue scale, American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons, Simple Shoulder Test, and Constant-Murley scores. Whether individual patients exceeded these scores' minimal clinically important difference was also determined. ResultsA total of 64 patients (group SPBT, 32; group BR, 32) were included in the final analysis. The duration of clinical follow-up was 36.2 ± 9.3 months in group SPBT and 29.4 ± 6.9 months in the BR group (P=0.002). Compared to group SPBT, group BR demonstrated a significantly lower retear rate (SPBT vs. BR: 34.4% vs. 12.5%, P=0.039). In the BR group, 8/32 (25%) patients demonstrated a postoperative LHBT tear. The four cuff retears in group BR only took place within these patients. Other postoperative radiographic and clinical outcomes were comparable between the groups. Within each group, significant postoperative improvements were demonstrated (P<0.05 for all clinical scores). ConclusionEven in the presence of a pathologic LHBT and/or a type II SLAP lesion, augmenting the rotator cuff repair with BR significantly reduced retear rates while achieving clinical scores comparable to SPBT in a minimum two-year follow-up.

Concomitant Biceps Tenodesis Does Not Portend Inferior Outcomes After Anterior Glenohumeral Stabilization

Background: Military patients are known to suffer disproportionately high rates of glenohumeral instability as well as superior labrum anterior to posterior (SLAP) tears. Additionally, a concomitant SLAP tear is frequently observed in patients with anterior shoulder instability. Even though biceps tenodesis has been demonstrated to produce superior outcomes to SLAP repair in military patients with isolated SLAP lesions, no existing studies have reported on outcomes after simultaneous tenodesis and anterior labral repair in patients with co-existing abnormalities. Purpose: To evaluate outcomes after simultaneous arthroscopic-assisted subpectoral biceps tenodesis and anterior labral repair in military patients younger than 40 years. We also sought to compare these outcomes with those after repair of an isolated anterior labral tear. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: This study is a retrospective analysis of all military patients younger than 40 years from a single base who underwent arthroscopic anterior glenohumeral stabilization with or without concomitant biceps tenodesis between January 2010 and December 2019. Patients with glenoid bone loss of >13.5% were not eligible for inclusion. Outcome measures including the visual analog scale (VAS) for pain, the Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (SANE), the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) shoulder score, the Rowe instability score, and range of motion were administered preoperatively and postoperatively, and scores were compared between groups. Results: A total of 82 patients met inclusion criteria for the study. All patients were active-duty service members at the time of surgery. The mean follow-up was 87.75 ± 27.05 months in the repair + tenodesis group and 94.07 ± 28.72 months in the isolated repair group (P = .3085). Patients who underwent repair + tenodesis had significantly worse preoperative VAS pain (6.85 ± 1.86 vs 5.02 ± 2.07, respectively; P < .001), ASES (51.78 ± 11.89 vs 62.43 ± 12.35, respectively; P = .0002), and Rowe (26.75 ± 7.81 vs 37.26 ± 14.91, respectively; P = .0002) scores than patients who underwent isolated repair. Both groups experienced significant improvements in outcome scores postoperatively (P < .0001 for all), and there were no statistically significant differences in postoperative outcome scores or range of motion between groups. There were no differences in the percentage of patients who achieved the minimal clinically important difference, substantial clinical benefit, and patient acceptable symptom state for the VAS pain, SANE, ASES, and Rowe scores between groups. Overall, 37 of the 40 (92.50%) patients in the repair + tenodesis group and 40 of the 42 (95.24%) patients in the isolated repair group returned to unrestricted active-duty military service (P = .6045). In addition, 38 (95.00%) patients in the repair + tenodesis group and 40 (95.24%) patients in the isolated repair group returned to preinjury levels of sporting activity (P = .9600). There were no significant differences in the number of failures, revision surgical procedures, or patients discharged from the military between groups (P = .9421, P = .9400, and P = .6045, respectively). Conclusion: The findings of this study indicate that simultaneous biceps tenodesis and labral repair was a viable treatment option for the management of concomitant SLAP and anterior labral lesions in young, active military patients younger than 40 years.

Outcomes Following Combined Posterior Labral and SLAP Repair in Military Patients Younger Than 35 Years

Background: Members of the military are known to experience disproportionately high rates of both glenohumeral instability and superior labrum anterior-posterior (SLAP) tears when compared with civilian populations. Although the outcomes after simultaneous repair of Bankart and SLAP lesions have been well described, there is a paucity of literature available regarding the operative management of posterior instability with concomitant superior labral pathology. Purpose: To compare outcomes of combined arthroscopic posterior labral and SLAP repair with those of isolated posterior labral repair. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: All consecutive patients younger than 35 years who underwent arthroscopic posterior labral repair from January 2011 to December 2016 with a minimum follow-up of 5 years were identified. From this cohort of eligible patients, all individuals who had undergone combined SLAP and posterior labral repair (SLAP cohort) versus posterior labral repair alone (instability cohort) were then identified. Outcome measures including the visual analog scale score, Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (SANE), American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) score, Rowe instability score, and range of motion were collected pre- and postoperatively and scores were compared between groups. Results: In total, 83 patients met the inclusion criteria for the study. All patients were active-duty military at the time of surgery. The mean follow-up was 93.79 ± 18.06 months in the instability group and 91.24 ± 18.02 months in the SLAP group (P = .5228). Preoperative SANE and ASES scores were significantly worse in the SLAP group. Both groups experienced statistically significant improvements in outcome scores postoperatively (P < .0001 for all), and there were no significant differences in any outcome scores or range of motion between groups. In total, 39 patients in the instability cohort and 37 in the SLAP cohort returned to preinjury levels of work (92.86% vs 90.24%, respectively; P = .7126), and 38 instability patients and 35 SLAP patients returned to preinjury levels of sporting activity (90.48% vs 85.37%, respectively; P = .5195). Two patients in the instability group and 4 patients in the SLAP group were medically discharged from the military (4.76% vs 9.76%; P = .4326), and 2 patients in each cohort had experienced treatment failure at the final follow-up (4.76% vs 4.88%; P > .9999). Conclusion: Combined posterior labral and SLAP repair led to statistically and clinically significant increases in outcome scores and high rates of return to active-duty military service that did not differ significantly from the results after isolated posterior labral repair. The results of this study indicate that simultaneous repair is a viable treatment option for the management of combined lesions in active-duty military patients <35 years of age.

Midterm Outcomes Following Combined Biceps Tenodesis and Anterior Labral Repair in Active Duty Military Patients Younger Than 35 Years

Background: Superior labrum anterior-posterior (SLAP) lesions and anterior instability are common causes of shoulder pain and dysfunction among active-duty members of the United States military. However, little data have been published regarding the surgical management of type V SLAP lesions. Purpose: To compare the outcomes of arthroscopic-assisted subpectoral biceps tenodesis and anterior labral repair with those of arthroscopic SLAP repair (defined as contiguous repair spanning from the superior labrum to the anteroinferior labrum) for type V SLAP tears in active-duty military patients younger than 35 years. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: All consecutive patients from January 2010 to December 2015 who underwent arthroscopic SLAP repair or combined biceps tenodesis and anterior labral repair for a type V SLAP lesion with a minimum 5-year follow-up were identified. The decision to perform type V SLAP repair versus combined biceps tenodesis and anterior labral repair was based on the condition of the long head of the biceps tendon (LHBT). Labral repair was performed in patients who had a type V SLAP tear with an otherwise clinically and anatomically healthy LHBT. Combined tenodesis and repair was performed in patients with evidence of LHBT abnormalities. Outcomes including the visual analog scale (VAS) score, the Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (SANE) score, the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) shoulder score, the Rowe instability score, and range of motion were collected preoperatively and postoperatively, and scores were compared between the groups. Results: A total of 84 patients met the inclusion criteria for the study. All patients were active-duty service members at the time of surgery. A total of 44 patients underwent arthroscopic type V SLAP repair, and 40 patients underwent anterior labral repair with biceps tenodesis. The mean follow-up was 102.59 ± 20.98 months in the repair group and 94.50 ± 27.11 months in the tenodesis group (P = .1281). There were no significant differences in preoperative range of motion or outcome scores between the groups. Both groups experienced statistically significant improvements in outcome scores postoperatively (P < .0001 for all); however, compared with the repair group, the tenodesis group reported significantly better postoperative VAS (2.52 ± 2.36 vs 1.50 ± 1.91, respectively; P = .0328), SANE (86.82 ± 11.00 vs 93.43 ± 8.81, respectively; P = .0034), and ASES (83.32 ± 15.31 vs 89.90 ± 13.31, respectively; P = .0394) scores. There were no differences in the percentage of patients who achieved the minimal clinically important difference, substantial clinical benefit, and patient acceptable symptom state for the SANE and ASES between the groups. Overall, 34 patients in each group returned to preinjury levels of work (77.3% vs 85.0%, respectively; P = .3677), and 32 patients (72.7%) in the repair group and 33 patients (82.5%) in the tenodesis group returned to preinjury levels of sporting activity (P = .2850). There were no significant differences in the number of failures, revision surgical procedures, or patients discharged from the military between the groups (P = .0923, P = .1602, and P = .2919, respectively). Conclusion: Both arthroscopic-assisted subpectoral biceps tenodesis combined with anterior labral repair and arthroscopic SLAP repair led to statistically and clinically significant increases in outcome scores, marked improvements in pain, and high rates of return to unrestricted active duty in military patients with type V SLAP lesions. The results of this study suggest that biceps tenodesis combined with anterior labral repair produces comparable outcomes to arthroscopic type V SLAP repair in active-duty military patients younger than 35 years.

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.

Return to Sport and Patient-Reported Outcomes After Subpectoral Biceps Tenodesis for SLAP Tear in Collegiate Gymnasts.

The biceps superior labral complex is a known source of shoulder dysfunction in young, high-level athletes. Superior labral anterior-posterior (SLAP) repairs are often unsatisfactory for treating biceps-labral pathology in this demographic group, with high failure rates and poor return to sport (RTS). Minimal data have been published to demonstrate patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and RTS in gymnasts after treatment of SLAP pathologies. Gymnasts undergoing biceps tenodesis for SLAP pathologies would have satisfactory PROs and satisfactory RTS. Case series; Level of evidence, 4. Gymnasts aged ≤25 years who underwent open subpectoral biceps tenodesis for SLAP tears with or without biceps tendon pathology between August 20, 2014, and August 20, 2019, and who had minimum 2-year follow-up data were included in this study. Tenodesis was performed using a subpectoral technique with bicortical button fixation. The following PROs were included: RTS, postoperative activity level, 10-point visual analog scale for pain (VAS-Pain), American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES), and Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) scores. Of 16 shoulders in 14 gymnasts undergoing biceps tenodesis for SLAP tear during the study period, a follow-up was obtained for 13 of 16 shoulders (81%) at 4.3 ± 1.5 years. The mean age of patients at the time of surgery was 21.8 ± 2.2 years, with 12 (92%) male patients. Biceps tenodesis was performed as the primary procedure for the diagnosis of SLAP tear in 12 patients (92%) and for failed prior SLAP repair in 1 patient (8%). PROs were excellent at the follow-up, with VAS-Pain scores of 1.8 ± 1.7, ASES scores of 89.1 ± 9.1, and DASH scores of 2.4 ± 3.2. After surgery, 8 (62%) patients returned to their prior level of collegiate gymnastics. Three (60%) of 5 patients did not return to collegiate gymnastics because of the end of eligibility, and 2 (40%) patients did not return to collegiate gymnastics because of knee injuries. Significantly higher DASH scores were noted in the group that did not RTS (P = .04). No patients experienced postoperative complications or reoperation. Biceps tenodesis was an effective primary operation for high-level gymnasts with SLAP tears, with a satisfactory rate of return to the same level of sport and excellent PROs.

What's New in Sports Medicine.

What's New in Sports Medicine.

Progress in arthroscopic surgery for injury of superior labrum anterior posterior of shoulder joint

Superior labrum anterior posterior (SLAP) injury is a major challenge for orthopedic surgeons, due to the poor healing ability of the injured labrum. Although arthroscopic surgery is the gold standard for the treatment of SLAP injury, there are still disputes about the adaptation of different surgical techniques, the choice of anchors during operation, knotted or knotless anchors, and fixation methods. The authors believe that arthroscopic repair of SLAP lesions is effective for young patients with intact glenoid labrum(<35 years old) or with extensive activity, where single and knotless anchor is preferred. For the older patients(≥35 years old) with degeneration and wear of glenoid labrum, biceps tenodesis is more preferable, and interference screw fixation technique is recommended. As for patients with failed SLAP repair, biceps tenodesis can achieve a high success rate as a revision surgery. By review of the relevant literature in recent years, this paper summarizes the adaptation of different surgical methods of arthroscopic treatment of SLAP injury, intraoperative anchoring techniques, fixation methods and other improved surgical techniques.

Sports Medicine Roundtable: Trends in 2022

The purpose of the JOPA Roundtable discussion is to give orthopaedic physician assistants an insight on how each participating editorial board member treats certain clinical scenarios in their current practice. For this Sports Medicine Roundtable, editorial board members with expertise in sports medicine will discuss sport trends in 2022. Topics discussed will include lateral extra-articular tenodesis with anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction, return to play protocols after anterior cruciate reconstruction and Bankart repair, superior labral anterior-posterior repair vs. biceps tenodesis, orthobiologics for knee osteoarthritis, and point of care ultrasound for the diagnosis of musculoskeletal conditions.

SLAP repair and bicep tenodesis: a comparison of utilization and revision rates for SLAP tears

The management of superior labrum anterior to posterior (SLAP) tears typically consists of either repair or biceps tenodesis (BT). While repair is more frequently recommended in younger patients, patients older than 40 years are often treated with BT. The purpose of this study is to determine whether there has been a change in utilization of these procedures over the past decade with respect to patient age as well as compare reoperation rates between the two procedures. The Pearldiver database was queried to identify BT and SLAP repairs indicated for SLAP tears performed from 2010 to 2019. The primary outcome was utilization rate, stratified by age. A secondary outcome was 2-year shoulder reoperation rates. Trends were reported in terms of compounded annual growth rate. Outcome analysis was conducted using univariate and multivariable analysis. From 2010 to 2019, SLAP repair was the most common procedure performed for SLAP tears. Regardless of age, BT performed for SLAP tear had a significantly increased utilization rate; whereas, SLAP repair had a significantly decreased utilization rate. SLAP repair was more commonly performed in younger patients compared to BT. Following multivariable analysis, patients who underwent SLAP repair had significantly higher odds (odds ratio (OR): 1.453; 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.26-1.68; P<.001) of requiring an arthroscopic reoperation within 2 years when compared to those who underwent BT with no significant difference with respect to 2-year open reoperation. Although SLAP repair is still more commonly used to treat SLAP tears than BT, especially for younger patients, the utilization of SLAP repair is decreasing while BT is increasing. The increased utilization of BT may be associated with lower rates of shoulder reoperation for problematic SLAP tears.

Current Best Treatment for Superior Labrum, Anterior to Posterior Tears

<h3>Objective(s)</h3> To investigate the current best treatment approach in regards to surgical and non-surgical approaches for Superior Labrum, Anterior to Posterior (SLAP) tears in the young athlete and older working adult population. <h3>Data Sources</h3> Google Scholar, PubMed, and ScienceDirect were searched for the terms(SLAP repair, biceps tenodesis, SLAP lesion, arthroscopic SLAP repair, and SLAP treatment).The search was limited to articles published between 2017 to present, English language and human participants. <h3>Study Selection</h3> Studies were selected based on approaches to SLAP tear i.e.: conservative rehabilitation, biceps tenodesis, SLAP repair, and combined biceps tenodesis with SLAP repair. From 31 articles that were initially adopted, 23 were selected and included in our review. <h3>Data Extraction</h3> Three reviewers independently reviewed each article and noted information provided in each article. The information included treatment methods (surgical vs rehabilitative) as well as differences in surgical approaches, return to play after various treatment methods, and cost analysis of various surgical approaches. <h3>Data Synthesis</h3> Individuals older than 35-40 with biceps tenodesis have lower risks of complications and revisions, decreased stiffness, less pain, and higher satisfaction rates with BT. SLAP repairs show better outcomes with younger athletes, SLAP repair in overhead athletes often leds to additional surgeries. However, no significant differences were found between the SLAP repair and BT for the overhead athletes. A combined SLAP repair and BT approach has shown the worst outcomes with less mobility, lower outcome measure scores, and increased pain. A conservative approach for 3 to 6 months however, is recommended before surgical options are considered. <h3>Conclusions</h3> Based on the current evidence, it appears that BT is an optimal choice for younger, less competitive athletes, as well as those individuals above the age of 35. Less favorable outcomes have been reported with the BT approach for competitive athletes and baseball pitchers; therefore, the healthcare team must work closely to determine the next best option on an individual basis. <h3>Author(s) Disclosures</h3> There are no conflict of interest associated with this study for any of the authors.

Combined Bankart and SLAP repair: patient-reported outcome measurements after a minimum 5-year follow-up.

Anterior shoulder instability is typically characterized by detachment of the anteroinferior labrum (Bankart lesion). Some patients also sustain a superior labrum anterior-to-posterior (SLAP) injury. The purpose of this study was to compare the medium-term clinical results of isolated anterior Bankart repairs (ABR) with those of combined Bankart and SLAP repair (ABR + SLAP). Data on all patients treated surgically for recurrent anterior shoulder instability between 2006 and 2011 were retrospectively collected from medical charts. The minimum follow-up was 5years. Patients were interviewed to assess patient-reported outcome measurements (PROM) as determined by the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Score (ASES), the Subjective Shoulder Score (SSV), and the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand Score (DASH), as well as their quality of life (QOL: SF12 questionnaire). Information on complications, re-operations, and recurrent instability was recorded and evaluated as well. A total of 150 patients (88% males) with a mean age 23.7years (range 15-40) were included. Forty-two patients following ABR + SLAP repair were compared to 108 patients following ABR alone, with a mean follow-up of 7.8years (range 5-10.7). The rate of re-dislocation was similar in both groups (26% for ABR + SLAP vs 20% for ABR, p = .44). There were no significant differences in functional outcome between the ABR + SLAP and the ABR alone groups (SSV 86.7 vs 86.5, p = .93, ASES 89.6 vs 86.5, p = .11, and DASH 4.9 vs 7, p = .17), or in QOL outcome (SF12 physical 95.6 vs 93.3, p = .27, SF12 mental 84.4 vs 85.7, p = .63). Surgical repair for anterior shoulder instability and a coexisting SLAP lesion yields clinical results as good as those of isolated ABR, as evidenced by similar PROM and re-dislocation rates after medium-term follow-up. III.

SLAP Repair Versus Subpectoral Biceps Tenodesis for Isolated SLAP Type 2 Lesions in Overhead Athletes Younger Than 35 Years: Comparison of Minimum 2-Year Outcomes.

Background:It remains unclear if young overhead athletes with isolated superior labrum anterior-posterior (SLAP) type 2 lesions benefit more from SLAP repair or subpectoral biceps tenodesis.Purpose:To evaluate clinical outcomes and return to sport in overhead athletes with symptomatic SLAP type 2 lesions who underwent either biceps tenodesis or SLAP repair.Study Design:Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3.Methods:A retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data was performed in patients who underwent subpectoral biceps tenodesis (n = 14) or SLAP repair (n = 24) for the treatment of isolated type 2 SLAP lesions. All patients were aged <35 years at time of surgery, participated in overhead sports, and were at least 2 years out from surgery. Clinical outcomes were assessed with the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) score; Single Assessment Numerical Evaluation (SANE) score; Quick Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (QuickDASH) score; and the 12-Item Short Form (SF-12) physical component score. Return to sport and patient satisfaction were documented. Clinical failures requiring revision surgery and complications were reported.Results:Preoperative baseline scores in both the tenodesis and SLAP repair groups were similar. There were no significant differences between the groups on any postoperative outcome measure: For biceps tenodesis versus SLAP repair, the ASES score was 92.7 ± 10.4 versus 89.1 ± 16.7, the SANE score was 86.2 ± 13.7 versus 83.0 ± 24.1, the QuickDASH score was 10.0 ± 12.7 versus 9.0 ± 14.3, and SF-12 was 51.2 ± 7.5 versus 52.8 ± 7.7. No group difference in return-to-sports rate (85% vs 79%; P = .640) was noted. More patients in the tenodesis group (80%) reported modifying their sporting/recreational activity postoperatively because of weakness compared with patients in the SLAP repair group (15%; P = .022). One patient in each group progressed to surgery for persistent postoperative stiffness, and 1 patient in the tenodesis group had a postoperative complication related to the index surgery.Conclusion:Both subpectoral biceps tenodesis and SLAP repair provided excellent clinical results for the treatment of isolated SLAP type 2 lesions, with a high rate of return to overhead sports and a low failure rate, in a young and high-demanding patient cohort. More patients reported modifying their sporting/recreational activity because of weakness after subpectoral tenodesis.

Postoperative Pain and Paresthesia in Labral Repairs of the Shoulder: Location Does Matter.

Background:Favorable outcomes have been reported regarding postoperative shoulder pain and function after repair of anteroinferior (Bankart) glenohumeral labral tears. However, the outcomes of patients after repair of isolated superior labral anterior-posterior (SLAP) tears are a contentious topic. The authors have also anecdotally noted that patients evaluated with labral tears complained of numbness and tingling in their ipsilateral hand.Purpose:To determine if there is a difference in the temporal outcomes of shoulder pain and hand paresthesia in patients with SLAP tears versus Bankart tears after arthroscopic repair.Study Design:Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3.Methods:Included were 66 consecutive patients who underwent arthroscopic labral repair at a single institution between August 2018 and February 2021. The prevalence and magnitude of shoulder pain as well as numbness and tingling of the hand were assessed using questions from the L’Insalata Shoulder Questionnaire and the Boston Carpal Tunnel Questionnaire preoperatively and at 1 week, 6 weeks, 12 weeks, and 6 months after surgery.Results:Preoperatively, patients with SLAP lesions reported a higher prevalence of shoulder pain during sleep compared with those with Bankart tears (P < .05). Postoperatively, patients who underwent SLAP repair reported a larger proportion and more severe magnitude of shoulder pain during rest, overhead activities, and sleep compared with those who underwent Bankart repair (P < .05). Only patients who underwent Bankart repair reported improvements in the prevalence and magnitude of their shoulder pain during rest, overhead activities, and sleep by 6 months postoperatively compared with preoperative levels (P < .05). Preoperatively, 30% of patients with Bankart repairs and 40% of patients with SLAP repairs reported hand tingling, while 35% and 50%, respectively, reported hand numbness. The prevalence and magnitude of hand tingling and numbness were not significantly different between groups at any time point.Conclusion:Study results indicated that patients who underwent SLAP repair experienced worse shoulder pain outcomes compared with those who underwent Bankart repair using the same anchor and surgical technique. Only patients who underwent Bankart repair reported improvements in their hand numbness after surgery. Therefore, labral tear location does matter with respect to shoulder pain and hand numbness.

Comparison of labral repair and biceps tenodesis concomitant with arthroscopic rotator cuff repair in patients between the age of 40 and 60

Aim: Superior labrum anterior to posterior (SLAP) lesions are frequently accompanied by rotator cuff tear (RCT). The optimal treatment for type 2 and 4 SLAP lesions with RCT were not established. We aimed to compare the clinical results of SLAP repair and biceps tenodesis (BT) concomitant with arthroscopic rotator cuff repair (ARCR) in patients between 40 and 60 years old. &#x0D; Material and Method: Forthy three patients (16 male, 27 females) who received ARCR concomitant with SLAP repair or BT for full-thickness rotator cuff tear were evaluated retrospectively. The patients were divided into the two groups based on treatment methods (SLAP repair, Group 1, 20 patients), (BT, Group 2, 23 patients). American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) score, University of California Los Angeles (UCLA) shoulder score, visual analogue scale scores (VASs), and range of motion (ROM) values were used as outcome tools. &#x0D; Results: The mean age of the patients was 48.8±5.03 years. There was no difference in preoperative shoulder and pain scores (P

High Rate of Satisfaction and Return to Play at 5-Year Follow-Up After Arthroscopic Superior-Labrum Anterior-Posterior Repairs

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the outcomes of patients 5 years postoperatively following arthroscopic SLAP repair, and to evaluate factors associated with satisfaction. A retrospective review of patients who underwent SLAP repair with a minimum of 5-year follow-up was performed. Recurrence, visual analog scale (VAS) score, Subjective Shoulder Value (SSV), American Shoulder & Elbow Surgeons (ASES) score, satisfaction, whether they would undergo the same surgery again, and the rate, level and timing of return to play (RTP) were evaluated. Multilinear regression models were used to evaluate factors affecting postoperative satisfaction. Overall, 122 patients who underwent SLAP repair were included, with a mean age of 33.4 years. 81% were males, and 58.2% were participating in sport preoperatively. The mean follow-up was 86.4 ± 14.4 months. At final follow up, the mean satisfaction was 87.7%, and the mean SSV was 82.9. Overall, the rate of RTP was 85.9%, with 64.8% returning at the same level at a mean of 10.5 ± 8 months. Ultimately, 13 (10.7%) patients had a further surgery, including 10 (8.2%) patients that had a biceps tenodesis. VAS during sport (P= .025), SSV (P < .001), and time to RTP (P= .0056), were associated with higher satisfaction. There was a high rate of satisfaction at 5-year follow-up, with excellent patient-reported outcomes but with one-tenth of patients requiring revision surgeries. Additionally, while there was an overall high rate of RTP, there was only a modest rate of RTP at their preinjury level, and overhead athletes took longer to RTP. IV, case series.

Current Controversies and Decision-Making in the Management of Biceps Pathologies.

Biceps tendon pathologies include a spectrum of injuries that range from mild tendinosis to complete tendon rupture. Tendinosis, the most common pathology, occurs more frequently with age and is likely related to chronic degeneration. On the other side of the spectrum of severity lies a rupture of the long head of the biceps tendon (LHBT), which may be accompanied by injury to the glenoid labrum. Superior labral anterior-posterior (SLAP) tears are frequently associated with biceps pathology. Surgical management for injuries of the bicipital-labral complex includes biceps tenodesis or tenotomy and SLAP repair. A consensus as to which of these procedures is the optimal choice has not been reached, and management may ultimately depend on patient-specific characteristics. Due to the relatively low incidence of distal biceps tendon rupture, agreement on the optimal management strategy has not been reached. Surgical repair, or reconstruction in the case of a chronic rupture, is often chosen. However, nonoperative management has also been utilized in older, less-active patients.

Biceps Tenodesis as an Attractive Alternative to Superior Labral Anterior-Posterior (SLAP) Repair for Type II SLAP Lesions in Active-Duty Military Patients Younger Than 35 Years

Background: Biceps tenodesis has been suggested as a superior surgical technique compared with isolated labral repair for superior labral anterior-posterior (SLAP) tears in patients older than 35 years. The superiority of this procedure in younger patients, however, is yet to be determined. Purpose: To compare the outcomes of arthroscopic SLAP repair with those of arthroscopic-assisted subpectoral biceps tenodesis for type II SLAP tears in active-duty military patients younger than 35 years. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: Preoperative and postoperative evaluations with a minimum 5-year follow-up including the visual analog scale (VAS), the Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (SANE), and the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) shoulder score were administered, and scores were compared between 2 groups of patients younger than 35 years. One group included 25 patients who underwent SLAP repair, and the second group included 23 patients who underwent arthroscopic-assisted subpectoral biceps tenodesis. Results: The preoperative patient age (P = .3639), forward flexion (P = .8214), external rotation (P = .5134), VAS pain score (P = .4487), SANE score (P = .6614), and ASES score (P = .6519) did not vary significantly between the 2 study groups. Both groups demonstrated statistically significant increases in function as measured by the ASES and SANE and decreases in pain as measured by the VAS at a minimum of 5 years postoperatively. Also at a minimum of 5 years postoperatively, patients in the tenodesis group had lower pain (1.3 vs 2.6, respectively; P = .0358) and higher SANE (84.0 vs 63.3, respectively; P = .0001) and ASES (85.7 vs 75.4, respectively; P = .0342) scores compared with those in the repair group. Failure rate was 20.0% in the repair group versus 0.0% in the tenodesis group (P = .0234). Conclusion: Active-duty military patients younger than 35 years with type II SLAP tears had more predictable improvement in pain, better functional outcomes, and lower failure rates after biceps tenodesis compared with SLAP repair for type II SLAP tears. Overall, the results of this study indicate that arthroscopic- assisted subpectoral biceps tenodesis is superior to arthroscopic SLAP repair for the treatment of type II SLAP tears in military patients younger than 35 years.