Superior Labrum Anterior-Posterior (SLAP) Repair Versus Subpectoral Biceps Tenodesis for Isolated SLAP II Lesions in Overhead Athletes Aged Younger 35 Years: A Comparison of Minimum Two-Year Outcomes

OBJECTIVES: In young overhead athletes with isolated superior labrum anterior-posterior (SLAP) type II lesions it remains unclear if patients benefit more from either SLAP repair or biceps tenodesis. The purpose of our study is to evaluate clinical outcomes and return to sports rates in overhead athletes suffering from symptomatic SLAP type II lesions who have undergone either biceps tenodesis or SLAP repair. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data was performed in patients who underwent subpectoral biceps tenodesis (group I) or SLAP repair (group II) for the treatment of isolated SLAP type II lesions, were younger than 35 years at time of surgery, participated in overhead sports, and were at least two years out from surgery. Clinical outcomes were assessed by the use of the American Shoulder and Elbow Society Score (ASES), Single Assessment Numerical Evaluation Score (SANE), Quick Disabilities of the Arm, and Shoulder and Hand Score (QuickDASH) and the General Health SF-12 physical component. Return to sports and patient satisfaction were documented. Clinical failures requiring revision surgery and complications were reported. RESULTS: Minimum 2-year follow-up was obtained in 12/14 (85.7%) patients in group I and in 23/27 (85%) patients in group II. Preoperative baseline scores between both groups showed no significantdifferences (p > 0.05). When group I was compared to group II, no significant differences inpostoperative outcome scores were detected (p > 0.05). For biceps tenodesis (Group I) vs SLAP repair (Group II): ASES score was mean 91.6 ± 11.3 vs 88.6 ± 16.9, SANE score was mean 77.5 ± 28.0 vs. 82.3 ± 24.4, QuickDASH score was mean 9.2± 12.2 vs 9.4 ± 14.5, and SF-12 was mean 52.0 ± 6.1 vs 52.6 ± 7.8. No difference in return to sports rate (91% vs 91%, p > .05) was noted. 1 patient in group I and 2 patients in group II failed. CONCLUSION: This study showed that both techniques of SLAP repair and subpectoral biceps tenodesis provide excellent clinical results with high return to overhead sports rate and low failure rate in a young and high-demanding patient cohort for the treatment of isolated SLAP type II lesions.