Advertisement

“Tomydesis” might be a reliable technique for lesions of the long head of the biceps tendon associated with rotator cuff tears: a minimum 6-month prospective clinical follow-up study

  • Ramy Samargandi
  • Waleed Abduh
  • Luc Favard
  • Christophe Le Du
  • Philippe Collin
  • Julien BerhouetEmail author
Original Article • SHOULDER - ARTHROSCOPY
  • 50 Downloads

Abstract

Purpose

To compare the clinical outcomes of self-locking T-tenotomy called “tomydesis” to three different techniques of tenodesis for lesions of the long head of the biceps tendon (LHBT) associated with rotator cuff tears.

Hypothesis

Tomydesis could provide similar clinical outcomes than the other LHBT tenodesis techniques.

Methods

This prospective multicentre study included 77 patients who underwent rotator cuff repair concomitant with one of four surgical techniques on the LHBT. All patients had a minimum of 6-month follow-up post-operatively. Outcomes were evaluated based on the Constant score, SSV, pain on visual analogue scale, biceps-specific pain and Popeye deformity on photographs.

Results

There was no difference for the pain at the biceps muscle belly (p = 0.58), the bicipital groove (p = 0.69) and during resisted supination (p = 0.53), as well as for muscle cramps (p = 0.09), VAS for pain (p = 0.12) and Popeye deformity (p = 0.18). There was more pain in resisted flexion in the tomydesis group (p = 0.032), and significantly better Constant scores and SSV (< 0.001) in the patients who underwent the double lasso loop technique, but non-repairable cuff tears were most frequent in the tomydesis group.

Conclusions

Tomydesis might be a reliable alternative that combines advantages of tenodesis and tenotomy. It should be considered in cases of rotator cuff tears, whose repair and healing are the key for good functional outcomes.

Level of evidence

II.

Keywords

Tomydesis T-tenotomy Biceps tenodesis Biceps tenotomy Long head of biceps Rotator cuff repair 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The authors thank Pascal Garaud for statistical analysis and Joanne Archambault for English-language editing.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

References

  1. 1.
    Boileau P, Krishnan SG, Coste JS, Walch G (2002) Arthroscopic biceps tenodesis: a new technique using bioabsorbable interference screw fixation. Arthroscopy 18(9):1002–1012CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Boileau P, Baque F, Valerio L, Ahrens P, Chuinard C, Trojani C (2007) Isolated arthroscopic biceps tenotomy or tenodesis improves symptoms in patients with massive irreparable rotator cuff tears. J Bone Joint Surg Am 89(4):747–757CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bradbury T, Dunn WR, Kuhn JE (2008) Preventing the popeye deformity after release of the long head of the biceps tendon: an alternative technique and biomechanical evaluation. Arthroscopy 24(10):1099–1102CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Cho NS, Cha SW, Rhee YG (2014) Funnel tenotomy versus intracuff tenodesis for lesions of the long head of the biceps tendon associated with rotator cuff tears. Am J Sports Med 42(5):1161–1168CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Clement X, Baldairon F, Clavert P, Kempf JF (2018) Popeye sign: tenodesis vs. self-locking “T” tenotomy of the long head of the biceps. Orthop Traum Surg Research 104(1):23–26CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Friedman JL, FitzPatrick JL, Rylander LS, Bennett C, Vidal AF, McCarty EC (2015) Biceps tenotomy versus tenodesis in active patients younger than 55 years: is there a difference in strength and outcomes? Orthop J Sports Med.  https://doi.org/10.1177/2325967115570848 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Frost A, Zafar MS, Maffulli N (2009) Tenotomy versus tenodesis in the management of pathologic lesions of the tendon of the long head of the biceps brachii. Am J Sports Med 37(4):828–833CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Fuchs B, Weishaupt D, Zanetti M, Hodler J, Gerber C (1999) Fatty degeneration of the muscles of the rotator cuff: assessment by computed tomography versus magnetic resonance imaging. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 8(6):599–605CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Galdi B, Southren DL, Brabston EW, Popkin CA, Jobin CM, Levine WN, Ahmad CS (2016) Patients have strong preferences and perceptions for biceps tenotomy versus tenodesis. Arthroscopy 32(12):2444–2450CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Goubier JN, Bihel T, Dubois E, Teboul F (2014) Loop biceps tenotomy: an arthroscopic technique for long head of biceps tenotomy. Arthrosc Tech 3(4):e427–e430CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Hsu AR, Ghodadra NS, Provencher MT, Lewis PB, Bach BR (2011) Biceps tenotomy versus tenodesis: a review of clinical outcomes and biomechanical results. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 20(2):326–332CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Lafosse L, Van Raebroeckx A, Brzoska R (2006) A new technique to improve tissue grip: “the lasso-loop stitch”. Arthroscopy 22(11):1246CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Lee HJ, Jeong JY, Kim CK, Kim YS (2016) Surgical treatment of lesions of the long head of the biceps brachii tendon with rotator cuff tear: a prospective randomized clinical trial comparing the clinical results of tenotomy and tenodesis. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 25(7):1107–1114CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Mazzocca AD, Bicos J, Santangelo S, Romeo AA, Arciero RA (2005) The biomechanical evaluation of four fixation techniques for proximal biceps tenodesis. Arthroscopy 21(11):1296–1306CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Narvani AA, Atoun E, Van Tongel A, Sforza G, Levy O (2013) The “anchor shape” technique for long head of the biceps tenotomy to avoid the popeye deformity. Arthrosc Tech 2(2):e167–e170CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Osbahr DC, Diamond AB, Speer KP (2002) The cosmetic appearance of the biceps muscle after long-head tenotomy versus tenodesis. Arthroscopy 18(5):483–487CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Sanders B, Lavery KP, Pennington S, Warner JJ (2012) Clinical success of biceps tenodesis with and without release of the transverse humeral ligament. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 21(1):66–71CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Toussaint B, Schnaser E, Lafosse L, Bahurel J, Gobezie R (2009) A new approach to improving the tissue grip of the medial-row repair in the suture-bridge technique: the “modified lasso-loop stitch”. Arthroscopy 25(6):691–695CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Walch G, Edwards TB, Boulahia A, Nove-Josserand L, Neyton L, Szabo I (2005) Arthroscopic tenotomy of the long head of the biceps in the treatment of rotator cuff tears: clinical and radiographic results of 307 cases. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 14(3):238–246CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Werner BC, Brockmeier SF, Gwathmey FW (2015) Trends in long head biceps tenodesis. Am J Sports Med 43(3):570–578CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Wittstein JR, Queen R, Abbey A, Toth A, Moorman CT 3rd (2011) Isokinetic strength, endurance, and subjective outcomes after biceps tenotomy versus tenodesis: a postoperative study. Am J Sports Med 39(4):857–865CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Zhang Q, Zhou J, Ge H, Cheng B (2015) Tenotomy or tenodesis for long head biceps lesions in shoulders with reparable rotator cuff tears: a prospective randomised trial. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 23(2):464–469CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag France SAS, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ramy Samargandi
    • 1
    • 2
  • Waleed Abduh
    • 1
    • 2
  • Luc Favard
    • 1
    • 2
  • Christophe Le Du
    • 3
  • Philippe Collin
    • 4
  • Julien Berhouet
    • 1
    • 2
    Email author
  1. 1.Service d’Orthopédie 1CCentre Hospitalier Universitaire de ToursToursFrance
  2. 2.Faculté de MédecineUniversité de Tours, PRES Centre-Val de Loire UniversitéToursFrance
  3. 3.Clinique de l’AllianceSaint-Cyr-Sur-LoireFrance
  4. 4.Centre Hospitalier Privé Saint-GrégoireSaint-GrégoireFrance

Personalised recommendations