PMID- 35859647
OWN - NLM
STAT- PubMed-not-MEDLINE
LR  - 20220722
IS  - 2325-9671 (Print)
IS  - 2325-9671 (Electronic)
IS  - 2325-9671 (Linking)
VI  - 10
IP  - 7
DP  - 2022 Jul
TI  - Outcomes of Biceps Tenotomy Versus Tenodesis During Arthroscopic Rotator Cuff 
      Repair: An Analysis of Patients From a Large Multicenter Database.
PG  - 23259671221110851
LID - 10.1177/23259671221110851 [doi]
LID - 23259671221110851
AB  - BACKGROUND: Studies to date evaluating biceps tenotomy versus tenodesis in the 
      setting of concomitant rotator cuff repair (RCR) have demonstrated relatively 
      equivalent pain and functional outcomes. HYPOTHESIS: It was hypothesized that a 
      significant difference could be demonstrated for pain and functional outcome 
      scores comparing biceps tenotomy versus tenodesis in the setting of RCR if the 
      study was adequately powered. STUDY DESIGN: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. 
      METHODS: The Arthrex Surgical Outcomes System database was queried for patients 
      who underwent arthroscopic biceps tenotomy or tenodesis and concomitant RCR 
      between 2013 and 2021; included patients had a minimum of 2 years of follow-up. 
      Outcomes between treatment types were assessed using the American Shoulder and 
      Elbow Surgeons Shoulder (ASES), Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (SANE), 
      visual analog scale (VAS) for pain, and Veterans RAND 12-Item Health Survey 
      (VR-12) scores preoperatively and at 3 months, 6 months, 1 year, and 2 years 
      postoperatively. Results were stratified by age at surgery (3 groups: <55, 55-65, 
      >65 years) and sex. RESULTS: Overall, 1936 primary RCRs were included for 
      analysis (1537 biceps tenodesis and 399 biceps tenotomy patients). Patients who 
      underwent tenotomy were older and more likely to be female. A greater proportion 
      of female patients aged <55 years and 55 to 65 years received a biceps tenotomy 
      compared with tenodesis (P = .012 and .026, respectively). All scores were 
      comparable between the treatment types preoperatively and at 3 months, 6 months, 
      and 1 year postoperatively. At 2-year follow-up, patients who received a biceps 
      tenodesis had statistically more favorable ASES, SANE, VAS pain, and VR-12 scores 
      (P </= .031); however, the differences did not exceed the minimal clinically 
      important difference (MCID) for these measures. CONCLUSION: Our findings indicate 
      that surgeons are more likely to perform a biceps tenotomy in female and older 
      patients. Biceps tenodesis provided improved pain and functional scores compared 
      with tenotomy at 2-year follow-up; however, the benefit did not exceed previously 
      reported MCID for the outcome scores. Both procedures provided improvement in 
      outcomes; thus, the choice of procedure should be a shared decision between the 
      surgeon and patient.
CI  - (c) The Author(s) 2022.
FAU - Srinivasan, Ramesh C
AU  - Srinivasan RC
AD  - Department of Orthopaedic Surgery and Sports Medicine, University of Florida, 
      Gainesville, Florida, USA.
FAU - Hao, Kevin A
AU  - Hao KA
AD  - College of Medicine, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida, USA.
FAU - Wright, Thomas W
AU  - Wright TW
AD  - Department of Orthopaedic Surgery and Sports Medicine, University of Florida, 
      Gainesville, Florida, USA.
FAU - Farmer, Kevin W
AU  - Farmer KW
AD  - Department of Orthopaedic Surgery and Sports Medicine, University of Florida, 
      Gainesville, Florida, USA.
FAU - Wright, Jonathan O
AU  - Wright JO
AD  - Department of Orthopaedic Surgery and Sports Medicine, University of Florida, 
      Gainesville, Florida, USA.
FAU - Roach, Ryan P
AU  - Roach RP
AD  - Department of Orthopaedic Surgery and Sports Medicine, University of Florida, 
      Gainesville, Florida, USA.
FAU - Moser, Michael W
AU  - Moser MW
AD  - Department of Orthopaedic Surgery and Sports Medicine, University of Florida, 
      Gainesville, Florida, USA.
FAU - Freidl, Michael C
AU  - Freidl MC
AD  - College of Medicine, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida, USA.
FAU - Pazik, Marissa
AU  - Pazik M
AD  - Department of Orthopaedic Surgery and Sports Medicine, University of Florida, 
      Gainesville, Florida, USA.
FAU - King, Joseph J
AU  - King JJ
AD  - Department of Orthopaedic Surgery and Sports Medicine, University of Florida, 
      Gainesville, Florida, USA.
LA  - eng
PT  - Journal Article
DEP - 20220715
PL  - United States
TA  - Orthop J Sports Med
JT  - Orthopaedic journal of sports medicine
JID - 101620522
PMC - PMC9290127
OTO - NOTNLM
OT  - biceps tenodesis
OT  - biceps tenotomy
OT  - rotator cuff repair
COIS- One or more of the authors has declared the following potential conflict of 
      interest or source of funding: R.C.S. has received education payments from 
      MedInc, speaking fees from Acumed, and hospitality payments from Integra 
      LifeSciences. T.W.W. has received consulting fees and royalties from Exactech. 
      K.W.F. has received education payments from Exactech; consulting fees from 
      Arthrex, Exactech, and Flexion Therapeutics; speaking fees from Arthrex, 
      Arthrosurface, and CGG Medical; honoraria from Arthrosurface and Baudax Bio; and 
      hospitality payments from Rotation Medical. J.O.W. has received education 
      payments from Pinnacle and hospitality payments from Acumed and Zimmer Biomet. 
      R.P.R. has received grant support from Arthrex and education payments from 
      Arthrex and Smith & Nephew. M.W.M. has received education payments from Fortis 
      Surgical and speaking fees from Arthrex. M.C.F. has received hospitality payments 
      from Arthrex. J.J.K. has received consulting fees from Exactech and hospitality 
      payments from Integra LifeSciences. AOSSM checks author disclosures against the 
      Open Payments Database (OPD). AOSSM has not conducted an independent 
      investigation on the OPD and disclaims any liability or responsibility relating 
      thereto.
EDAT- 2022/07/22 06:00
MHDA- 2022/07/22 06:01
PMCR- 2022/07/15
CRDT- 2022/07/21 02:15
PHST- 2022/04/06 00:00 [received]
PHST- 2022/05/12 00:00 [accepted]
PHST- 2022/07/21 02:15 [entrez]
PHST- 2022/07/22 06:00 [pubmed]
PHST- 2022/07/22 06:01 [medline]
PHST- 2022/07/15 00:00 [pmc-release]
AID - 10.1177_23259671221110851 [pii]
AID - 10.1177/23259671221110851 [doi]
PST - epublish
SO  - Orthop J Sports Med. 2022 Jul 15;10(7):23259671221110851. doi: 
      10.1177/23259671221110851. eCollection 2022 Jul.