Where to tenodese the biceps

Proximal or distal?

David M. Lutton, Konrad I. Gruson, Alicia K. Harrison, James N. Gladstone, Evan L. Flatow

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

61 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: The best location for biceps tenodesis is controversial as surgeons have begun to question whether tenodesis location affects the incidence of residual bicipital postoperative pain. An open distal tenodesis technique has been previously proposed to eliminate remaining symptoms at the bicipital groove. Questions/purposes: We asked the following questions: (1) Does a higher tenodesis in the biceps groove result in postoperative pain? And (2) can the tenodesis location be successfully moved more distally ("suprapectoral tenodesis") by an arthroscopic technique? Methods: We retrospectively reviewed 17 patients undergoing arthroscopic biceps tenodesis and evaluated their tenodesis location, either within the upper half of the groove (five) or in the lower half of the groove or shaft (12). Patient outcomes were assessed with visual analog scale scores for pain, American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons scores, and Constant-Murley scores. Minimum followup was 12 months (mean, 28 months; range, 12-69 months). Results: Two patients had persistent pain at 12 months; both had a tenodesis in the upper half of the groove. The overall American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons and Constant-Murley scores were improved at latest followup. Conclusions: Arthroscopic suprapectoral biceps tenodesis represents a new technique for distal tenodesis. Our preliminary observations suggest a more distal tenodesis location may decrease the incidence of persistent postoperative pain at the bicipital groove, although additional research is needed to definitively state whether the proximal location is in fact more painful. Level of Evidence: Level III, therapeutic study. See Guidelines for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1050-1055
Number of pages6
JournalClinical Orthopaedics and Related Research
Volume469
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - Apr 2011
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Tenodesis
Postoperative Pain
Elbow
Incidence
Pain Measurement

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Orthopedics and Sports Medicine

Cite this

Where to tenodese the biceps : Proximal or distal? / Lutton, David M.; Gruson, Konrad I.; Harrison, Alicia K.; Gladstone, James N.; Flatow, Evan L.

In: Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research, Vol. 469, No. 4, 04.2011, p. 1050-1055.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Lutton, DM, Gruson, KI, Harrison, AK, Gladstone, JN & Flatow, EL 2011, 'Where to tenodese the biceps: Proximal or distal?', Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research, vol. 469, no. 4, pp. 1050-1055. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11999-010-1691-z
Lutton, David M. ; Gruson, Konrad I. ; Harrison, Alicia K. ; Gladstone, James N. ; Flatow, Evan L. / Where to tenodese the biceps : Proximal or distal?. In: Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research. 2011 ; Vol. 469, No. 4. pp. 1050-1055.
@article{1614e3b97c9849119e505f2d36a8dead,
title = "Where to tenodese the biceps: Proximal or distal?",
abstract = "Background: The best location for biceps tenodesis is controversial as surgeons have begun to question whether tenodesis location affects the incidence of residual bicipital postoperative pain. An open distal tenodesis technique has been previously proposed to eliminate remaining symptoms at the bicipital groove. Questions/purposes: We asked the following questions: (1) Does a higher tenodesis in the biceps groove result in postoperative pain? And (2) can the tenodesis location be successfully moved more distally ({"}suprapectoral tenodesis{"}) by an arthroscopic technique? Methods: We retrospectively reviewed 17 patients undergoing arthroscopic biceps tenodesis and evaluated their tenodesis location, either within the upper half of the groove (five) or in the lower half of the groove or shaft (12). Patient outcomes were assessed with visual analog scale scores for pain, American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons scores, and Constant-Murley scores. Minimum followup was 12 months (mean, 28 months; range, 12-69 months). Results: Two patients had persistent pain at 12 months; both had a tenodesis in the upper half of the groove. The overall American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons and Constant-Murley scores were improved at latest followup. Conclusions: Arthroscopic suprapectoral biceps tenodesis represents a new technique for distal tenodesis. Our preliminary observations suggest a more distal tenodesis location may decrease the incidence of persistent postoperative pain at the bicipital groove, although additional research is needed to definitively state whether the proximal location is in fact more painful. Level of Evidence: Level III, therapeutic study. See Guidelines for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.",
author = "Lutton, {David M.} and Gruson, {Konrad I.} and Harrison, {Alicia K.} and Gladstone, {James N.} and Flatow, {Evan L.}",
year = "2011",
month = "4",
doi = "10.1007/s11999-010-1691-z",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "469",
pages = "1050--1055",
journal = "Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research",
issn = "0009-921X",
publisher = "Springer New York",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Where to tenodese the biceps

T2 - Proximal or distal?

AU - Lutton, David M.

AU - Gruson, Konrad I.

AU - Harrison, Alicia K.

AU - Gladstone, James N.

AU - Flatow, Evan L.

PY - 2011/4

Y1 - 2011/4

N2 - Background: The best location for biceps tenodesis is controversial as surgeons have begun to question whether tenodesis location affects the incidence of residual bicipital postoperative pain. An open distal tenodesis technique has been previously proposed to eliminate remaining symptoms at the bicipital groove. Questions/purposes: We asked the following questions: (1) Does a higher tenodesis in the biceps groove result in postoperative pain? And (2) can the tenodesis location be successfully moved more distally ("suprapectoral tenodesis") by an arthroscopic technique? Methods: We retrospectively reviewed 17 patients undergoing arthroscopic biceps tenodesis and evaluated their tenodesis location, either within the upper half of the groove (five) or in the lower half of the groove or shaft (12). Patient outcomes were assessed with visual analog scale scores for pain, American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons scores, and Constant-Murley scores. Minimum followup was 12 months (mean, 28 months; range, 12-69 months). Results: Two patients had persistent pain at 12 months; both had a tenodesis in the upper half of the groove. The overall American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons and Constant-Murley scores were improved at latest followup. Conclusions: Arthroscopic suprapectoral biceps tenodesis represents a new technique for distal tenodesis. Our preliminary observations suggest a more distal tenodesis location may decrease the incidence of persistent postoperative pain at the bicipital groove, although additional research is needed to definitively state whether the proximal location is in fact more painful. Level of Evidence: Level III, therapeutic study. See Guidelines for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

AB - Background: The best location for biceps tenodesis is controversial as surgeons have begun to question whether tenodesis location affects the incidence of residual bicipital postoperative pain. An open distal tenodesis technique has been previously proposed to eliminate remaining symptoms at the bicipital groove. Questions/purposes: We asked the following questions: (1) Does a higher tenodesis in the biceps groove result in postoperative pain? And (2) can the tenodesis location be successfully moved more distally ("suprapectoral tenodesis") by an arthroscopic technique? Methods: We retrospectively reviewed 17 patients undergoing arthroscopic biceps tenodesis and evaluated their tenodesis location, either within the upper half of the groove (five) or in the lower half of the groove or shaft (12). Patient outcomes were assessed with visual analog scale scores for pain, American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons scores, and Constant-Murley scores. Minimum followup was 12 months (mean, 28 months; range, 12-69 months). Results: Two patients had persistent pain at 12 months; both had a tenodesis in the upper half of the groove. The overall American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons and Constant-Murley scores were improved at latest followup. Conclusions: Arthroscopic suprapectoral biceps tenodesis represents a new technique for distal tenodesis. Our preliminary observations suggest a more distal tenodesis location may decrease the incidence of persistent postoperative pain at the bicipital groove, although additional research is needed to definitively state whether the proximal location is in fact more painful. Level of Evidence: Level III, therapeutic study. See Guidelines for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=79955836133&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=79955836133&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1007/s11999-010-1691-z

DO - 10.1007/s11999-010-1691-z

M3 - Article

VL - 469

SP - 1050

EP - 1055

JO - Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research

JF - Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research

SN - 0009-921X

IS - 4

ER -