Cargando…

The Loop Tenodesis Procedure—From Biomechanics to First Clinical Results

(1) Introduction: Several surgical therapy options for the treatment of pathologies of the long biceps tendon (LHB) have been established. However, tenotomy, as well as established tenodesis techniques, has disadvantages, such as cosmetic deformities, functional impairments and residual shoulder pai...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Riedl, Moritz, Mayr, Agnes, Greiner, Stefan, Pfeifer, Christian, Weiss, Isabella, Forchhammer, Lina, Alt, Volker, Kerschbaum, Maximilian
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7865652/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33498610
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jcm10030432
_version_ 1783647896759959552
author Riedl, Moritz
Mayr, Agnes
Greiner, Stefan
Pfeifer, Christian
Weiss, Isabella
Forchhammer, Lina
Alt, Volker
Kerschbaum, Maximilian
author_facet Riedl, Moritz
Mayr, Agnes
Greiner, Stefan
Pfeifer, Christian
Weiss, Isabella
Forchhammer, Lina
Alt, Volker
Kerschbaum, Maximilian
author_sort Riedl, Moritz
collection PubMed
description (1) Introduction: Several surgical therapy options for the treatment of pathologies of the long biceps tendon (LHB) have been established. However, tenotomy, as well as established tenodesis techniques, has disadvantages, such as cosmetic deformities, functional impairments and residual shoulder pain. This study presents the first clinical and structural results of the recently introduced loop tenodesis procedure for the LHB, developed to overcome these issues. (2) Methods: 37 patients (11 women, 26 men, mean age 52 years), who underwent loop tenodesis of the LHB were examined six months after surgery. For the clinical evaluation the Constant score, as well as the LHB score, were used, complemented by elbow flexion and supination strength measurements. The integrity of the tenodesis construct was evaluated indirectly by sonographic detection of the LHB in the bicipital groove. (3) Results: Both, the overall Constant score as well as the LHB score showed significant improvements six months postoperatively, as compared to the preoperative value. Fourteen patients (38%) presented an examiner-dependent upper arm deformity, although only five patients (13%) reported subjective cosmetic deformities. Both, flexion and supination strength were preserved compared to the preoperative level. In 35 patients (95%), the tenodesis in the bicipital groove was proofed sonographically. (4) Conclusion: The loop tenodesis of the LHB provides good-to-excellent overall clinical results after a short-term follow-up of six month. The incidence of cosmetic deformities was inferior compared to conventional therapy options (tenotomy and anchor tenodesis).
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7865652
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-78656522021-02-07 The Loop Tenodesis Procedure—From Biomechanics to First Clinical Results Riedl, Moritz Mayr, Agnes Greiner, Stefan Pfeifer, Christian Weiss, Isabella Forchhammer, Lina Alt, Volker Kerschbaum, Maximilian J Clin Med Article (1) Introduction: Several surgical therapy options for the treatment of pathologies of the long biceps tendon (LHB) have been established. However, tenotomy, as well as established tenodesis techniques, has disadvantages, such as cosmetic deformities, functional impairments and residual shoulder pain. This study presents the first clinical and structural results of the recently introduced loop tenodesis procedure for the LHB, developed to overcome these issues. (2) Methods: 37 patients (11 women, 26 men, mean age 52 years), who underwent loop tenodesis of the LHB were examined six months after surgery. For the clinical evaluation the Constant score, as well as the LHB score, were used, complemented by elbow flexion and supination strength measurements. The integrity of the tenodesis construct was evaluated indirectly by sonographic detection of the LHB in the bicipital groove. (3) Results: Both, the overall Constant score as well as the LHB score showed significant improvements six months postoperatively, as compared to the preoperative value. Fourteen patients (38%) presented an examiner-dependent upper arm deformity, although only five patients (13%) reported subjective cosmetic deformities. Both, flexion and supination strength were preserved compared to the preoperative level. In 35 patients (95%), the tenodesis in the bicipital groove was proofed sonographically. (4) Conclusion: The loop tenodesis of the LHB provides good-to-excellent overall clinical results after a short-term follow-up of six month. The incidence of cosmetic deformities was inferior compared to conventional therapy options (tenotomy and anchor tenodesis). MDPI 2021-01-23 /pmc/articles/PMC7865652/ /pubmed/33498610 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jcm10030432 Text en © 2021 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Article
Riedl, Moritz
Mayr, Agnes
Greiner, Stefan
Pfeifer, Christian
Weiss, Isabella
Forchhammer, Lina
Alt, Volker
Kerschbaum, Maximilian
The Loop Tenodesis Procedure—From Biomechanics to First Clinical Results
title The Loop Tenodesis Procedure—From Biomechanics to First Clinical Results
title_full The Loop Tenodesis Procedure—From Biomechanics to First Clinical Results
title_fullStr The Loop Tenodesis Procedure—From Biomechanics to First Clinical Results
title_full_unstemmed The Loop Tenodesis Procedure—From Biomechanics to First Clinical Results
title_short The Loop Tenodesis Procedure—From Biomechanics to First Clinical Results
title_sort loop tenodesis procedure—from biomechanics to first clinical results
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7865652/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33498610
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jcm10030432
work_keys_str_mv AT riedlmoritz thelooptenodesisprocedurefrombiomechanicstofirstclinicalresults
AT mayragnes thelooptenodesisprocedurefrombiomechanicstofirstclinicalresults
AT greinerstefan thelooptenodesisprocedurefrombiomechanicstofirstclinicalresults
AT pfeiferchristian thelooptenodesisprocedurefrombiomechanicstofirstclinicalresults
AT weissisabella thelooptenodesisprocedurefrombiomechanicstofirstclinicalresults
AT forchhammerlina thelooptenodesisprocedurefrombiomechanicstofirstclinicalresults
AT altvolker thelooptenodesisprocedurefrombiomechanicstofirstclinicalresults
AT kerschbaummaximilian thelooptenodesisprocedurefrombiomechanicstofirstclinicalresults
AT riedlmoritz looptenodesisprocedurefrombiomechanicstofirstclinicalresults
AT mayragnes looptenodesisprocedurefrombiomechanicstofirstclinicalresults
AT greinerstefan looptenodesisprocedurefrombiomechanicstofirstclinicalresults
AT pfeiferchristian looptenodesisprocedurefrombiomechanicstofirstclinicalresults
AT weissisabella looptenodesisprocedurefrombiomechanicstofirstclinicalresults
AT forchhammerlina looptenodesisprocedurefrombiomechanicstofirstclinicalresults
AT altvolker looptenodesisprocedurefrombiomechanicstofirstclinicalresults
AT kerschbaummaximilian looptenodesisprocedurefrombiomechanicstofirstclinicalresults