Repair of distal biceps tendon rupture with suture anchors

1999 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 125-131 ◽  
Author(s):  
Scott A. Lynch ◽  
David M. Beard ◽  
P. A. F. H. Renström
Keyword(s):  
Tendon Rupture ◽  
Biceps Tendon ◽  
Suture Anchors ◽  
Distal Biceps Tendon ◽  
Distal Biceps ◽  
Distal Biceps Tendon Rupture ◽  
Biceps Tendon Rupture

Distal biceps tendon rupture

2004 ◽  
Vol 14 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
OlgaD. Savvidou ◽  
PanayiotisJ. Papagelopoulos ◽  
AndreasF. Mavrogenis ◽  
AntoniosA. Partsinevelos ◽  
EvangelosJ. Karadimas ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Tendon Rupture ◽  
Biceps Tendon ◽  
Distal Biceps Tendon ◽  
Distal Biceps ◽  
Distal Biceps Tendon Rupture ◽  
Biceps Tendon Rupture

scholarly journals Acute distal biceps tendon rupture: retrospective analysis of two different approaches and fixation techniques

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marco Di Stefano ◽  
Lorenzo Sensi ◽  
Leonardo di Bella ◽  
Raffaele Tucci ◽  
Efisio Bazzucchi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Tendon Rupture ◽  
Biceps Tendon ◽  
Dash Score ◽  
Complication Rates ◽  
Distal Biceps Tendon ◽  
Distal Biceps ◽  
Distal Biceps Tendon Rupture ◽  
Biceps Tendon Rupture ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Flexion Extension

Abstract Purpose The aim of our study is to compare the modified double incision (DI) with bone tunnel reinsertion with the single-incision (SI) double tension slide technique in terms of clinical and functional outcomes and complication rates. Methods A retrospective comparative analysis was performed on 65 patients treated for total distal biceps tendon rupture. The surgical technique adopted for each patient was based on the preference of two experienced elbow surgeons. The DASH and MAYO questionnaires, functional outcome and ROM were recorded in all subjects. Results Of 65 patients, we collected data of a cohort of 54 distal biceps tendon ruptures that satisfied inclusion criteria. Twenty-five were treated by modified DI and 29 SI techniques. The recovery of the complete ROM in terms of flexion/extension and prono-supination occurred in the 79.6% of the patients, without statistical significant difference between the adopted technique. We reported a complication rate of 12% and 20.7% for DI and SI techniques, respectively, without statistical correlation (P = 0.84). The average DASH score was similar for DI and SI techniques without significant differences (P = 0,848). The Mayo score results were excellent in the majority of the patients. No significant difference in MAYO results was reported comparing the surgical techniques (P = 1). Conclusion Both techniques provide a reliable and strong repair with an optimal recovery of ROM returning to preinjury activity with substantially overlapping timelines.

BET 1: Best Evidence Topic Report: is the hook test sensitive enough to be used to exclude distal biceps tendon rupture?

2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (1) ◽  
pp. 78.2-79
Author(s):  
David Annison ◽  
James McVie
Keyword(s):  
Upper Limb ◽  
Tendon Rupture ◽  
Biceps Tendon ◽  
Clinical Question ◽  
Single Test ◽  
Distal Biceps Tendon ◽  
Distal Biceps ◽  
Distal Biceps Tendon Rupture ◽  
Biceps Tendon Rupture ◽  
Study Type

A shortcut review was carried out to see whether the hook test is sensitive enough for a negative result to exclude complete distal biceps tendon rupture (DBTR) in adults. 3 papers presented the best evidence to answer the clinical question. The author, date and country of publication, patient group studied, study type, relevant outcomes, results and study weaknesses of these papers are tabulated. It is concluded that the hook test is moderately sensitive at detecting complete DBTR when carried out by skilled clinicians in specialist upper limb clinics. As a single test, it is not sensitive enough to be used to exclude complete DBTR.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document