Comparing the outcomes of arthroscopic tenodesis versus tenotomy for the treatment of the long head of biceps tendon pathologies during supraspinatus tendon repair

Abstract

Aim: Long head of the biceps tendon pathologies are frequently accompanied by full-thickness rotator cuff tear. The purpose of this study was to compare functional scores, complication rates and time to return to work after tenotomy and tenodesis who underwent arthroscopic supraspinatus repair (ASR). Methods: Overall, 129 patients who underwent ASR surgery were divided into 2 groups. Group 1 consisted of 62 patients who underwent biceps tenodesis and group 2 consisted of 67 patients who underwent biceps tenotomy. We evaluated demographic data, clinical findings, complications and American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons, Constant Murley, Visual analogue scale and 36-item Short Form subscale scores. Results: Mean follow-up time was 13.68±4.22 months. Mean postoperative and preoperative-postoperative differences of ASES, CM, VAS and SF-36 subscale scores were not significantly different between the two groups. Popeye sign was positive for 13 (19.4%) patients in group 2, however, none of patients in group 1 was positive (p<0.001). Other complications were not significantly different between two groups. Conclusion: The results show that arthroscopic biceps tenotomy and tenodesis are both viable treatments for proximal biceps tendon pathology, yielding similar clinical outcomes in the context of concomitant rotator cuff repair. Tenotomy can be chosen instead of tenodesis, which is technically more difficult and expensive