Poster 171: No Difference in Clinical Outcomes for Arthroscopic Suprapectoral versus Open Subpectoral Bicep Tenodesis: A Randomized Prospective Analysis

OBJECTIVES: Our group has previously reported the 1-year outcomes arthroscopic suprapectoral biceps tenodesis (ASPBT) versus open subpectoral biceps for the management of long head of the biceps tendon (LHBT) pathology. While patients had similar 1-year biceps strength and pain, any ongoing changes in functional outcomes is yet unknown. We aimed to directly compare clinical outcomes of ASPBT versus OSPBT with interference screw fixation, distal to the bony bicipital groove, at 2 years follow-up. METHODS: Eighty-seven patients undergoing biceps tenodesis for LHBT disease were randomized into the ASPBT group or OSPBT group. Both techniques utilized polyether ether ketone (PEEK) inference screws for tenodesis fixation. Patients completed American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeon (ASES), Constant subjective, and Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (SANE) questionnaires preoperatively, and again at 6 months, 12 months and final follow-up at minimum 24 months. RESULTS: Seven-five patients (37/46 randomized to ASPBT [80%], 38/41 randomized to OSPBT [93%]) with a mean age of 50.3 ± 10.4 years and a mean body mass index of 28.9 ± 6.3 were included in clinical outcome analyses. Mean final follow-up was 35.1 months (ASPBT: 35.4 months, OSPBT: 34.9 months, range 24-63 months). Comparison of demographic characteristics and intraoperative findings showed no significant difference in age, gender, concomitant procedures, and rotator cuff disease. No statistically significant differences in ASES (P =.26), Constant subjective scores (P = .60), and SANE scores (P = .74) were found at final follow-up. Clinical outcomes scores showed no significant improvement from 12.6 months to final follow-up at 35.1 months (ASPBT: ASES, P=0.42; Constant, P=0.23; SANE, P=0.43 v. OSPBT: ASES, P=0.76; Constant, P=0.57; SANE, P=0.64). The mean SANE score in the ASPBT group had a statistically nonsignificant, 6.1-point increase from 1 to 3 years post-operatively (p = .23), which was greater than the minimal clinically importance difference (MCID). No patients required revision of biceps tenodesis in either group. CONCLUSIONS: No significant differences in patient-reported outcomes and complication rates were found at any time point between subjects undergoing ASPBT or OSPBT, utilizing the same interference screw technique, for the management of LHBT pathology.