Cargando…

Complications of Distal Biceps Tendon Repair: A Meta-analysis of Single-Incision Versus Double-Incision Surgical Technique

BACKGROUND: Anatomic reinsertion of the distal biceps is critical for restoring flexion and supination strength. Single- and double-incision surgical techniques have been reported, analyzing complications and outcomes measures. Which technique results in superior clinical outcomes and the lowest ass...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Amin, Nirav H., Volpi, Alex, Lynch, T. Sean, Patel, Ronak M., Cerynik, Douglas L., Schickendantz, Mark S., Jones, Morgan H.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: SAGE Publications 2016
Materias:
14
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5056595/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27766276
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2325967116668137
_version_ 1782458933432025088
author Amin, Nirav H.
Volpi, Alex
Lynch, T. Sean
Patel, Ronak M.
Cerynik, Douglas L.
Schickendantz, Mark S.
Jones, Morgan H.
author_facet Amin, Nirav H.
Volpi, Alex
Lynch, T. Sean
Patel, Ronak M.
Cerynik, Douglas L.
Schickendantz, Mark S.
Jones, Morgan H.
author_sort Amin, Nirav H.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Anatomic reinsertion of the distal biceps is critical for restoring flexion and supination strength. Single- and double-incision surgical techniques have been reported, analyzing complications and outcomes measures. Which technique results in superior clinical outcomes and the lowest associated complications remains unclear. HYPOTHESIS: We hypothesized that rerupture rates would be similar between the 2 techniques, while nerve complications would be higher for the single-incision technique and heterotopic ossification would be more frequent with the double-incision technique. STUDY DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis; Level of evidence, 4. METHODS: A systematic review was conducted using the PubMed, MEDLINE, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), SPORTSDiscus, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases to identify articles reporting distal biceps ruptures up to August 2013. We included English-language articles on adult patients with a minimum of 3 cases reporting single- and double-incision techniques. Frequencies of each complication as a percentage of total cases were calculated. Fisher exact tests were used to test the association between frequencies for each repair method, with P < .05 considered statistically significant. Odds ratios with 95% CIs were also computed. RESULTS: A total of 87 articles met the inclusion criteria. Lateral antebrachial cutaneous nerve neurapraxia was the most common complication in the single-incision group, occurring in 77 of 785 cases (9.8%). Heterotopic ossification was the most common complication in the double-incision group, occurring in 36 of 498 cases (7.2%). CONCLUSION: The overall frequency of reported complications is higher for single-incision distal biceps repair than for double-incision repair. The frequencies of rerupture and nerve complications are both higher for single-incision repairs while the frequency of heterotopic ossification is higher for double-incision repairs. These findings can help surgeons make better-informed decisions about surgical technique and provide their patients with detailed information about expected outcomes and possible complications.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5056595
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher SAGE Publications
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-50565952016-10-20 Complications of Distal Biceps Tendon Repair: A Meta-analysis of Single-Incision Versus Double-Incision Surgical Technique Amin, Nirav H. Volpi, Alex Lynch, T. Sean Patel, Ronak M. Cerynik, Douglas L. Schickendantz, Mark S. Jones, Morgan H. Orthop J Sports Med 14 BACKGROUND: Anatomic reinsertion of the distal biceps is critical for restoring flexion and supination strength. Single- and double-incision surgical techniques have been reported, analyzing complications and outcomes measures. Which technique results in superior clinical outcomes and the lowest associated complications remains unclear. HYPOTHESIS: We hypothesized that rerupture rates would be similar between the 2 techniques, while nerve complications would be higher for the single-incision technique and heterotopic ossification would be more frequent with the double-incision technique. STUDY DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis; Level of evidence, 4. METHODS: A systematic review was conducted using the PubMed, MEDLINE, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), SPORTSDiscus, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases to identify articles reporting distal biceps ruptures up to August 2013. We included English-language articles on adult patients with a minimum of 3 cases reporting single- and double-incision techniques. Frequencies of each complication as a percentage of total cases were calculated. Fisher exact tests were used to test the association between frequencies for each repair method, with P < .05 considered statistically significant. Odds ratios with 95% CIs were also computed. RESULTS: A total of 87 articles met the inclusion criteria. Lateral antebrachial cutaneous nerve neurapraxia was the most common complication in the single-incision group, occurring in 77 of 785 cases (9.8%). Heterotopic ossification was the most common complication in the double-incision group, occurring in 36 of 498 cases (7.2%). CONCLUSION: The overall frequency of reported complications is higher for single-incision distal biceps repair than for double-incision repair. The frequencies of rerupture and nerve complications are both higher for single-incision repairs while the frequency of heterotopic ossification is higher for double-incision repairs. These findings can help surgeons make better-informed decisions about surgical technique and provide their patients with detailed information about expected outcomes and possible complications. SAGE Publications 2016-10-06 /pmc/articles/PMC5056595/ /pubmed/27766276 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2325967116668137 Text en © The Author(s) 2016 http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/ This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 License (http://www.creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/) which permits non-commercial use, reproduction and distribution of the work as published without adaptation or alteration, without further permission provided the original work is attributed as specified on the SAGE and Open Access pages (https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/open-access-at-sage).
spellingShingle 14
Amin, Nirav H.
Volpi, Alex
Lynch, T. Sean
Patel, Ronak M.
Cerynik, Douglas L.
Schickendantz, Mark S.
Jones, Morgan H.
Complications of Distal Biceps Tendon Repair: A Meta-analysis of Single-Incision Versus Double-Incision Surgical Technique
title Complications of Distal Biceps Tendon Repair: A Meta-analysis of Single-Incision Versus Double-Incision Surgical Technique
title_full Complications of Distal Biceps Tendon Repair: A Meta-analysis of Single-Incision Versus Double-Incision Surgical Technique
title_fullStr Complications of Distal Biceps Tendon Repair: A Meta-analysis of Single-Incision Versus Double-Incision Surgical Technique
title_full_unstemmed Complications of Distal Biceps Tendon Repair: A Meta-analysis of Single-Incision Versus Double-Incision Surgical Technique
title_short Complications of Distal Biceps Tendon Repair: A Meta-analysis of Single-Incision Versus Double-Incision Surgical Technique
title_sort complications of distal biceps tendon repair: a meta-analysis of single-incision versus double-incision surgical technique
topic 14
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5056595/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27766276
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2325967116668137
work_keys_str_mv AT aminniravh complicationsofdistalbicepstendonrepairametaanalysisofsingleincisionversusdoubleincisionsurgicaltechnique
AT volpialex complicationsofdistalbicepstendonrepairametaanalysisofsingleincisionversusdoubleincisionsurgicaltechnique
AT lynchtsean complicationsofdistalbicepstendonrepairametaanalysisofsingleincisionversusdoubleincisionsurgicaltechnique
AT patelronakm complicationsofdistalbicepstendonrepairametaanalysisofsingleincisionversusdoubleincisionsurgicaltechnique
AT cerynikdouglasl complicationsofdistalbicepstendonrepairametaanalysisofsingleincisionversusdoubleincisionsurgicaltechnique
AT schickendantzmarks complicationsofdistalbicepstendonrepairametaanalysisofsingleincisionversusdoubleincisionsurgicaltechnique
AT jonesmorganh complicationsofdistalbicepstendonrepairametaanalysisofsingleincisionversusdoubleincisionsurgicaltechnique