Display options
Cite
Kovack TJ, Idoine JD, Jacob PB. Proximal Biceps Tenodesis: An Anatomic Study and Comparison of the Accuracy of Arthroscopic and Open Techniques Using Interference Screws. Orthop J Sports Med. 2014;2(2):2325967114522198doi: 10.1177/2325967114522198.
Kovack, T. J., Idoine, J. D., & Jacob, P. B. (2014). Proximal Biceps Tenodesis: An Anatomic Study and Comparison of the Accuracy of Arthroscopic and Open Techniques Using Interference Screws. Orthopaedic journal of sports medicine, 2(2), 2325967114522198. https://doi.org/10.1177/2325967114522198
Kovack, Thomas J, et al. "Proximal Biceps Tenodesis: An Anatomic Study and Comparison of the Accuracy of Arthroscopic and Open Techniques Using Interference Screws." Orthopaedic journal of sports medicine vol. 2,2 (2014): 2325967114522198. doi: https://doi.org/10.1177/2325967114522198
Kovack TJ, Idoine JD, Jacob PB. Proximal Biceps Tenodesis: An Anatomic Study and Comparison of the Accuracy of Arthroscopic and Open Techniques Using Interference Screws. Orthop J Sports Med. 2014 Feb 19;2(2):2325967114522198. doi: 10.1177/2325967114522198. eCollection 2014 Feb. PMID: 26535300; PMCID: PMC4555622.
Copy Download .nbib Format: NLM
Share it on

Orthop J Sports Med. 2014 Feb 19;2(2):2325967114522198. doi: 10.1177/2325967114522198. eCollection 2014 Feb.

Proximal Biceps Tenodesis: An Anatomic Study and Comparison of the Accuracy of Arthroscopic and Open Techniques Using Interference Screws.

Orthopaedic journal of sports medicine

Thomas J Kovack, John D Idoine, Paul B Jacob

Affiliations

  1. Orthopedic Specialists of Central Ohio, Hilliard, Ohio, USA.
  2. Doctors Hospital of Columbus, Columbus, Ohio, USA.

PMID: 26535300 PMCID: PMC4555622 DOI: 10.1177/2325967114522198

Abstract

PURPOSE: To (1) better define the anatomy of the proximal shoulder in relation to the long head of the biceps tendon, (2) compare the length-tension relationship of the biceps tendon in the native shoulder with that after arthroscopic and open tenodesis techniques using interference screws, and (3) provide surgical recommendations for both procedures based on study findings.

STUDY DESIGN: Descriptive laboratory study.

METHODS: Twenty fresh-frozen cadaveric shoulders were dissected for analysis. Initial anatomic measurements involving the proximal long head of the biceps tendon (BT) were made, which included: the labral origin to the superior bicipital groove (LO-SBG), the total tendon length (TTL), the musculotendinous junction (MTJ) to the inferior pectoralis major tendon border, the MTJ to the superior pectoralis major tendon border, and the biceps tendon diameter (BTD) at 2 different tenodesis locations. These same measurements were made again after completing a simulated suprapectoral arthroscopic and open subpectoral tenodesis, both with interference screw fixation. Statistical comparisons were then made between the native anatomy and that after tenodesis, with the goal of assessing the accuracy of re-establishing the normal length-tension relationship of the long head of the BT after simulated arthroscopic suprapectoral and open subpectoral tenodesis with tenodesis screws.

RESULTS: For all cadavers, the mean TTL was 104.1 mm. For the arthroscopic suprapectoral technique, the mean LO-SBG was 33.6 mm, and the mean tendon resection length was 12.8 mm in males and 5.0 mm in females. The mean BTD was 6.35 mm at the arthroscopic suprapectoral tenodesis site and 5.75 mm at the open subpectoral tenodesis site. Males were found to have statistically longer TTL and LO-SBG measurements (111.6 vs 96.5 mm [P = .027] and 37.2 vs 30.0 mm [P = .009], respectively). In the native shoulder, the mean distances from the MTJ to the superior and inferior borders of the pectoralis major tendon were 23.8 and 31.7 mm, respectively. No statistically significant differences were found in the location of the MTJ after simulated arthroscopic or open tenodesis with tenodesis screws as compared with the native shoulder. Mean hole depth in the open subpectoralis tenodesis was 22.4 mm (males) and 18.6 mm (females), with a mean of 20.5 mm for both sexes.

CONCLUSION: This study better defines the anatomy of the proximal shoulder in relationship to the long head of the BT. Using our surgical techniques and recommendations, both arthroscopic and open tenodesis procedures adequately restored the native length-tension relationship of the long head of the biceps. Surgical recommendations are as follows: For arthroscopic suprapectoral tenodesis with tenodesis screws, the anatomic landmark of the SBG should be used. The tendon resection length should be approximately 1 cm in males and 5 mm in females when using a 25-mm tunnel. For subpectoral tenodesis, the site of tenodesis should be placed approximately 3 cm above the inferior border of the pectoralis major tendon in the bicipital groove; whipstitching and preserving approximately 2 cm of the biceps tendon above the MTJ is also recommended. The diameter of the screws in either location should be based on patient anatomy. However, this study shows the need for slightly longer screws for the subpectoral tenodesis, as the average hole depth was 20.5 mm. The system used in this study has 7 × 10-mm and 8 × 12-mm screws available. Based on study findings, a screw length of 15 to 18 mm may be needed.

Keywords: biceps; open tenodesis; shoulder; tendonitis arthroscopic; tenodesis

References

  1. J Hand Surg Am. 2012 Sep;37(9):1917-24 - PubMed
  2. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2011 Apr;469(4):1050-5 - PubMed
  3. Arthroscopy. 2005 Nov;21(11):1296-306 - PubMed
  4. Am J Sports Med. 2005 Oct;33(10):1536-44 - PubMed
  5. Arthroscopy. 2002 Nov-Dec;18(9):1002-12 - PubMed
  6. J Orthop Surg (Hong Kong). 2011 Dec;19(3):379-83 - PubMed
  7. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2007 Apr;89(4):747-57 - PubMed
  8. Am J Sports Med. 2005 Feb;33(2):208-13 - PubMed
  9. Orthop Clin North Am. 2003 Oct;34(4):499-506 - PubMed
  10. Arthroscopy. 2012 Oct;28(10):1352-8 - PubMed
  11. Am J Sports Med. 2009 May;37(5):929-36 - PubMed
  12. Sports Med Arthrosc. 2008 Sep;16(3):187-94 - PubMed
  13. Sports Med Arthrosc. 2008 Sep;16(3):162-9 - PubMed
  14. Arthroscopy. 2005 Jul;21(7):896 - PubMed
  15. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1988 Mar;(228):233-9 - PubMed
  16. Oper Orthop Traumatol. 2012 Nov;24(6):479-85 - PubMed
  17. Am J Sports Med. 2011 May;39(5):1046-52 - PubMed
  18. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2011 Apr;20(3):477-80 - PubMed
  19. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2010 Nov;18(11):645-56 - PubMed
  20. Arthroscopy. 2004 Jan;20(1):85-95 - PubMed
  21. Arthroscopy. 2008 Oct;24(10):1103-8 - PubMed
  22. Am J Sports Med. 2012 Oct;40(10):2337-41 - PubMed

Publication Types