Pan Am Clinic and University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada.
McGovern Medical School, University of Texas Health Sciences Center, Houston, Texas, USA.
Am J Sports Med. 2020 May;48(6):1439-1449. doi: 10.1177/0363546520912212. Epub 2020 Mar 30.
The biceps tendon is a known source of shoulder pain. Few high-level studies have attempted to determine whether biceps tenotomy or tenodesis is the optimal approach in the treatment of biceps pathology. Most available literature is of lesser scientific quality and shows varying results in the comparison of tenotomy and tenodesis.
To compare patient-reported and objective clinical results between tenotomy and tenodesis for the treatment of lesions of the long head of the biceps brachii.
Randomized controlled trial; Level of evidence, 1.
Patients aged ≥18 years undergoing arthroscopic surgery with intraoperative confirmation of a lesion of the long head of the biceps tendon were randomized. The primary outcome measure was the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) score, while secondary outcomes included the Western Ontario Rotator Cuff Index (WORC) score, elbow and shoulder strength, operative time, complications, and the incidence of revision surgery with each procedure. Magnetic resonance imaging was performed at postoperative 1 year to evaluate the integrity of the procedure in the tenodesis group.
A total of 114 participants with a mean age of 57.7 years (range, 34 years to 86 years) were randomized to undergo either biceps tenodesis or tenotomy. ASES and WORC scores improved significantly from pre- to postoperative time points, with a mean difference of 32.3% ( < .001) and 37.3% ( < .001), respectively, with no difference between groups in either outcome from presurgery to postoperative 24 months. The relative risk of cosmetic deformity in the tenotomy group relative to the tenodesis group at 24 months was 3.5 (95% CI, 1.26-9.70; = .016), with 4 (10%) occurrences in the tenodesis group and 15 (33%) in the tenotomy group. Pain improved from 3 to 24 months postoperatively ( < .001) with no difference between groups. Cramping was not different between groups, nor was any improvement in cramping seen over time. There were no differences between groups in elbow flexion strength or supination strength. Follow-up magnetic resonance imaging at postoperative 12 months showed that the tenodesis was intact for all patients.
Tenotomy and tenodesis as treatment for lesions of the long head of biceps tendon both result in good subjective outcomes but there is a higher rate of Popeye deformity in the tenotomy group.
NCT01747902 ( ClinicalTrials.gov identifier).
肱二头肌肌腱是引起肩部疼痛的已知原因。很少有高水平的研究试图确定肱二头肌切断术或肱二头肌固定术哪种方法是治疗肱二头肌病变的最佳方法。大多数可用的文献质量较低,在比较切断术和固定术时显示出不同的结果。
比较肱二头肌长头肌腱切断术与固定术治疗肱二头肌长头病变的患者报告和客观临床结果。
随机对照试验;证据水平,1 级。
对接受关节镜手术且术中证实存在肱二头肌长头肌腱病变的患者进行随机分组。主要结局指标为美国肩肘外科医师协会(ASES)评分,次要结局指标包括 Western Ontario Rotator Cuff 指数(WORC)评分、肘部和肩部力量、手术时间、并发症以及两种手术方法的翻修手术发生率。术后 1 年进行磁共振成像(MRI)检查,以评估固定术组手术的完整性。
共有 114 名平均年龄 57.7 岁(范围 34 岁至 86 岁)的参与者被随机分为肱二头肌固定术或切断术组。ASES 和 WORC 评分均从术前到术后时间点显著改善,分别平均提高 32.3%( <.001)和 37.3%( <.001),两组在术后 24 个月时的任何结局指标上均无差异。术后 24 个月时,切断术组相对于固定术组的美容畸形的相对风险为 3.5(95%CI,1.26-9.70; =.016),固定术组有 4 例(10%),而切断术组有 15 例(33%)。术后 3 个月至 24 个月疼痛得到改善( <.001),两组之间无差异。两组之间的抽筋无差异,且随着时间的推移,抽筋也没有任何改善。两组的肘部屈曲力量或旋后力量无差异。术后 12 个月的随访 MRI 显示所有患者的固定术均完整。
肱二头肌长头肌腱病变的切断术和固定术治疗均能获得良好的主观疗效,但切断术组的 Popeye 畸形发生率较高。
NCT01747902(ClinicalTrials.gov 标识符)。