AJSM signin
HOME HELP CONTACT US SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Chavan, P. R.
Right arrow Articles by Bisson, L. J.
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Chavan, P. R.
Right arrow Articles by Bisson, L. J.
Related Collections
Right arrow Operative
Right arrow Biomechanics
The American Journal of Sports Medicine 36:1618-1624 (2008)
© 2008 American Orthopaedic Society for Sports Medicine

Clinical Sports Medicine Update

Repair of the Ruptured Distal Biceps Tendon

A Systematic Review

Prithviraj R. Chavan, MD, Thomas R. Duquin, MD and Leslie J. Bisson, MD*

From the University of Buffalo Sports Medicine and University of Buffalo Department of Orthopaedics, Buffalo, New York

* Address correspondence to Leslie J. Bisson, MD, 4949 Harlem Road, Amherst, NY, 14226 (e-mail: klbisson{at}aol.com).

Background: Reinsertion of the acutely ruptured distal biceps is the preferred method of treatment for most patients and is designed to restore flexion and supination strength. It is not clear which, if any, method of fixation is superior or whether a 2-incision or single-incision approach is associated with fewer complications or better outcomes.

Hypotheses: (1) There is no difference in biomechanical performance between currently used fixation methods, (2) there is no difference in incidence of complications between the 2-incision and single-incision approach, and (3) there is no difference in clinical outcomes between the 2-incision and single-incision approach.

Study Design: Systematic review; Level of evidence, 4.

Methods: The authors performed a systematic review of the literature studying treatment of the ruptured distal biceps tendon to determine optimal fixation method as well as surgical approach with lowest incidence of complications and highest proportion of satisfactory results.

Results: The review identified 8 articles that had relevant biomechanical data, 23 with relevant complication data, and 19 with relevant clinical results data. EndoButton fixation performed best in comparative biomechanical studies. There was no difference in overall incidence of complications between 2-incision approaches (16%) and single-incision approaches (18%), but there were significantly more instances of significant loss of forearm rotation with the 2-incision approach. There were significantly more unsatisfactory clinical results in the 2-incision repair group (31% vs 6%; odds ratio, 7.6; 95% confidence interval, 3.2–17.7), with the majority of unsatisfactory results in the 2-incision group due to loss of forearm rotation or rotational strength.

Conclusion: EndoButton fixation has the highest load and stiffness of currently available fixation methods. Two-incision repairs have a significantly greater proportion of unsatisfactory results than do single-incision repairs.

Key Words: distal biceps • systematic review • tendon • biceps • rupture






HOME HELP CONTACT US SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 2008 by the American Orthopaedic Society for Sports Medicine.