Cargando…
Clinical Outcomes of Arthroscopic Tenodesis Versus Tenotomy for Long Head of the Biceps Tendon Lesions: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials and Cohort Studies
BACKGROUND: Controversy exists concerning whether tenotomy or tenodesis is the optimal surgical treatment option for proximal biceps tendon lesions. PURPOSE: To evaluate the clinical outcomes after arthroscopic tenodesis and tenotomy in the treatment of long head of the biceps tendon (LHBT) lesions....
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
SAGE Publications
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8071980/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33997057 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2325967121993805 |
_version_ | 1783683824092184576 |
---|---|
author | Liu, Hongzhi Song, Xinqiu Liu, Pei Yu, Huachen Zhang, Qidong Guo, Wanshou |
author_facet | Liu, Hongzhi Song, Xinqiu Liu, Pei Yu, Huachen Zhang, Qidong Guo, Wanshou |
author_sort | Liu, Hongzhi |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Controversy exists concerning whether tenotomy or tenodesis is the optimal surgical treatment option for proximal biceps tendon lesions. PURPOSE: To evaluate the clinical outcomes after arthroscopic tenodesis and tenotomy in the treatment of long head of the biceps tendon (LHBT) lesions. STUDY DESIGN: Systematic review; Level of evidence, 4. METHODS: A systematic review was performed by searching PubMed, the Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and Embase to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and cohort studies that compared the clinical efficacy of tenotomy with that of tenodesis for LHBT lesions. A standardized data extraction form was predesigned to obtain bibliographic information of the study as well as patient, intervention, comparison, and outcome data. A random-effects model was used to pool quantitative data from the primary outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 21 eligible studies were separated into 3 methodological groups: (1) 4 RCTs with level 1 evidence, (2) 3 RCTs and 4 prospective cohort studies with level 2 evidence, and (3) 10 retrospective cohort studies with level 3 to 4 evidence. Analysis of the 3 groups demonstrated a significantly higher risk of the Popeye sign after tenotomy versus tenodesis (group 1: risk ratio [RR], 3.29 [95% CI, 1.92-5.49]; group 2: RR, 2.35 [95% CI, 1.43-3.85]; and group 3: RR, 2.57 [95% CI, 1.33-4.98]). Arm cramping pain remained significantly higher after tenotomy only in the retrospective cohort group (RR, 2.17 [95% CI, 1.20-3.95]). The Constant score for tenotomy was significantly worse than that for tenodesis in the prospective cohort group (standardized mean difference [SMD], –0.47 [95% CI, –0.73 to –0.21]), as were the forearm supination strength index (SMD, –0.75 [95% CI, –1.28 to –0.21]) and the Simple Shoulder Test (SST) score (SMD, –0.60 [95% CI, –0.94 to –0.27]). CONCLUSION: The results demonstrated that compared with tenodesis, tenotomy had a higher risk of a Popeye deformity in all 3 study groups; worse functional outcomes in terms of the Constant score, forearm supination strength index, and SST score according to prospective cohort studies; and a higher incidence of arm cramping pain according to retrospective cohort studies. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8071980 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | SAGE Publications |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-80719802021-05-13 Clinical Outcomes of Arthroscopic Tenodesis Versus Tenotomy for Long Head of the Biceps Tendon Lesions: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials and Cohort Studies Liu, Hongzhi Song, Xinqiu Liu, Pei Yu, Huachen Zhang, Qidong Guo, Wanshou Orthop J Sports Med Article BACKGROUND: Controversy exists concerning whether tenotomy or tenodesis is the optimal surgical treatment option for proximal biceps tendon lesions. PURPOSE: To evaluate the clinical outcomes after arthroscopic tenodesis and tenotomy in the treatment of long head of the biceps tendon (LHBT) lesions. STUDY DESIGN: Systematic review; Level of evidence, 4. METHODS: A systematic review was performed by searching PubMed, the Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and Embase to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and cohort studies that compared the clinical efficacy of tenotomy with that of tenodesis for LHBT lesions. A standardized data extraction form was predesigned to obtain bibliographic information of the study as well as patient, intervention, comparison, and outcome data. A random-effects model was used to pool quantitative data from the primary outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 21 eligible studies were separated into 3 methodological groups: (1) 4 RCTs with level 1 evidence, (2) 3 RCTs and 4 prospective cohort studies with level 2 evidence, and (3) 10 retrospective cohort studies with level 3 to 4 evidence. Analysis of the 3 groups demonstrated a significantly higher risk of the Popeye sign after tenotomy versus tenodesis (group 1: risk ratio [RR], 3.29 [95% CI, 1.92-5.49]; group 2: RR, 2.35 [95% CI, 1.43-3.85]; and group 3: RR, 2.57 [95% CI, 1.33-4.98]). Arm cramping pain remained significantly higher after tenotomy only in the retrospective cohort group (RR, 2.17 [95% CI, 1.20-3.95]). The Constant score for tenotomy was significantly worse than that for tenodesis in the prospective cohort group (standardized mean difference [SMD], –0.47 [95% CI, –0.73 to –0.21]), as were the forearm supination strength index (SMD, –0.75 [95% CI, –1.28 to –0.21]) and the Simple Shoulder Test (SST) score (SMD, –0.60 [95% CI, –0.94 to –0.27]). CONCLUSION: The results demonstrated that compared with tenodesis, tenotomy had a higher risk of a Popeye deformity in all 3 study groups; worse functional outcomes in terms of the Constant score, forearm supination strength index, and SST score according to prospective cohort studies; and a higher incidence of arm cramping pain according to retrospective cohort studies. SAGE Publications 2021-04-23 /pmc/articles/PMC8071980/ /pubmed/33997057 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2325967121993805 Text en © The Author(s) 2021 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 4.0 License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) 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 | Article Liu, Hongzhi Song, Xinqiu Liu, Pei Yu, Huachen Zhang, Qidong Guo, Wanshou Clinical Outcomes of Arthroscopic Tenodesis Versus Tenotomy for Long Head of the Biceps Tendon Lesions: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials and Cohort Studies |
title | Clinical Outcomes of Arthroscopic Tenodesis Versus Tenotomy for Long Head of the Biceps Tendon Lesions: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials and Cohort Studies |
title_full | Clinical Outcomes of Arthroscopic Tenodesis Versus Tenotomy for Long Head of the Biceps Tendon Lesions: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials and Cohort Studies |
title_fullStr | Clinical Outcomes of Arthroscopic Tenodesis Versus Tenotomy for Long Head of the Biceps Tendon Lesions: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials and Cohort Studies |
title_full_unstemmed | Clinical Outcomes of Arthroscopic Tenodesis Versus Tenotomy for Long Head of the Biceps Tendon Lesions: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials and Cohort Studies |
title_short | Clinical Outcomes of Arthroscopic Tenodesis Versus Tenotomy for Long Head of the Biceps Tendon Lesions: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials and Cohort Studies |
title_sort | clinical outcomes of arthroscopic tenodesis versus tenotomy for long head of the biceps tendon lesions: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials and cohort studies |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8071980/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33997057 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2325967121993805 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT liuhongzhi clinicaloutcomesofarthroscopictenodesisversustenotomyforlongheadofthebicepstendonlesionsasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofrandomizedclinicaltrialsandcohortstudies AT songxinqiu clinicaloutcomesofarthroscopictenodesisversustenotomyforlongheadofthebicepstendonlesionsasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofrandomizedclinicaltrialsandcohortstudies AT liupei clinicaloutcomesofarthroscopictenodesisversustenotomyforlongheadofthebicepstendonlesionsasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofrandomizedclinicaltrialsandcohortstudies AT yuhuachen clinicaloutcomesofarthroscopictenodesisversustenotomyforlongheadofthebicepstendonlesionsasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofrandomizedclinicaltrialsandcohortstudies AT zhangqidong clinicaloutcomesofarthroscopictenodesisversustenotomyforlongheadofthebicepstendonlesionsasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofrandomizedclinicaltrialsandcohortstudies AT guowanshou clinicaloutcomesofarthroscopictenodesisversustenotomyforlongheadofthebicepstendonlesionsasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofrandomizedclinicaltrialsandcohortstudies |