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

{"title":"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","authors":"","doi":"10.1016/j.arthro.2024.01.024","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Purpose</h3><p><span>To evaluate the radiographic and clinical outcomes when rerouting a pathologic biceps during arthroscopic rotator cuff repair by comparing it with concomitant subpectoral biceps </span>tenodesis (SPBT).</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p><span><span>This retrospective, historical cohort study was conducted with patients who underwent an </span>arthroscopic repair of a full-thickness </span>rotator cuff tear<span>, with intraoperative confirmation of biceps pathology including partial tears, subluxation<span>, pulley lesions, or type II SLAP lesions. Until May 2018, such patients were treated with concomitant subpectoral tenodesis (group SPBT). Afterward, biceps rerouting (BR) 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 1-year postoperative magnetic resonance imaging results. Clinical evaluation<span><span> with a minimum 2-year follow-up included pain visual analog scale, American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons, Simple Shoulder Test, and Constant–Murley scores. Whether individual patients exceeded these scores' </span>minimal clinically important difference also was determined.</span></span></span></p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>A 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 (<em>P</em> = .002). Compared with group SPBT, group BR demonstrated a significantly lower retear rate (SPBT vs BR: 34.4% vs 12.5%, <em>P</em> = .039). In the BR group, 8 of 32 (25%) patients demonstrated a postoperative LHBT tear. The 4 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 (<em>P &lt;</em> .05 for all clinical scores).</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>Even 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 with SPBT in a minimum 2-year follow-up.</p></div><div><h3>Level of Evidence</h3><p>Level III, retrospective comparative study.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":55459,"journal":{"name":"Arthroscopy-The Journal of Arthroscopic and Related Surgery","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Arthroscopy-The Journal of Arthroscopic and Related Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0749806324000689","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose

To evaluate the radiographic and clinical outcomes when rerouting a pathologic biceps during arthroscopic rotator cuff repair by comparing it with concomitant subpectoral biceps tenodesis (SPBT).

Methods

This 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 SLAP lesions. Until May 2018, such patients were treated with concomitant subpectoral tenodesis (group SPBT). Afterward, biceps rerouting (BR) 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 1-year postoperative magnetic resonance imaging results. Clinical evaluation with a minimum 2-year follow-up included pain visual analog scale, American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons, Simple Shoulder Test, and Constant–Murley scores. Whether individual patients exceeded these scores' minimal clinically important difference also was determined.

Results

A 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 = .002). Compared with group SPBT, group BR demonstrated a significantly lower retear rate (SPBT vs BR: 34.4% vs 12.5%, P = .039). In the BR group, 8 of 32 (25%) patients demonstrated a postoperative LHBT tear. The 4 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 < .05 for all clinical scores).

Conclusions

Even 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 with SPBT in a minimum 2-year follow-up.

Level of Evidence

Level III, retrospective comparative study.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
在肩袖修复过程中,无论是否存在肱二头肌-腓肠肌病变,肱二头肌重新路由都能降低再撕裂率,其临床疗效与胸骨下肱二头肌腱鞘切除术相当。
目的:通过与同时进行的胸骨下肱二头肌腱膜切除术进行比较,评估在关节镜下肩袖修复术中对病变肱二头肌进行改道时的影像学和临床效果:这项回顾性历史队列研究的对象是接受关节镜下全厚度肩袖撕裂修复术的患者,术中确认肱二头肌病变包括部分撕裂、半脱位、滑轮病变或 II 型上唇前后(SLAP)病变。在2018年5月之前,这类患者都同时接受胸骨下腱鞘切除术(SPBT组)治疗。之后,无论肱二头肌病变与否,均进行肱二头肌改道(BR组),不进行肱二头肌或SLAP修复。通过术前和术后一年的核磁共振成像,对包括脂肪变性、肩峰距离、Sugaya分类和再撕裂在内的放射学参数进行评估。随访至少两年的临床评估包括疼痛视觉模拟量表、美国肩肘外科医生(American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons)评分、简单肩关节测试(Simple Shoulder Test)评分和康斯坦茨-莫利(Constant-Murley)评分。此外,还确定了个别患者是否超过了这些评分的最小临床重要差异:共有 64 名患者(SPBT 组 32 人;BR 组 32 人)被纳入最终分析。SPBT 组的临床随访时间为(36.2 ± 9.3)个月,BR 组为(29.4 ± 6.9)个月(P=0.002)。与 SPBT 组相比,BR 组的再撕裂率明显较低(SPBT vs. BR:34.4% vs. 12.5%,P=0.039)。在BR组中,8/32(25%)的患者在术后出现LHBT撕裂。BR组的4例袖带再撕裂仅发生在这些患者中。两组患者术后的其他影像学和临床结果相当。在每组中,术后效果都有明显改善(PC结论:即使存在病理性 LHBT 和/或 II 型 SLAP 病变,通过 BR 增强肩袖修复术也能显著降低再撕裂率,同时在至少两年的随访中获得与 SPBT 相当的临床评分。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
9.30
自引率
17.00%
发文量
555
审稿时长
58 days
期刊介绍: Nowhere is minimally invasive surgery explained better than in Arthroscopy, the leading peer-reviewed journal in the field. Every issue enables you to put into perspective the usefulness of the various emerging arthroscopic techniques. The advantages and disadvantages of these methods -- along with their applications in various situations -- are discussed in relation to their efficiency, efficacy and cost benefit. As a special incentive, paid subscribers also receive access to the journal expanded website.
期刊最新文献
Editorial Commentary: Arthroscopic Bone Grafting Using Suspensory Fixation for Anterior Glenohumeral Fixation with Bone Loss May Supersede Latarjet Using Coracoid Transfer. Editorial Commentary: In Cases of Cam Over-resection and Irreparable Hip Labral Tear Requiring Revision, Acetabular Circumferential Labral Reconstruction with Larger Graft Width Is Indicated. Editorial Commentary: Repair of Radial Meniscus Tears. Editorial Commentary:Varus Recurrence After Medial Opening Wedge HTO. Introducing Foundations of Arthroscopy Techniques.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1