Der Orthopäde

, Volume 47, Issue 2, pp 113–120 | Cite as

Moderne Behandlungsstrategien der langen Bizepssehne

Leitthema
  • 218 Downloads

Zusammenfassung

Die lange Sehne des M. biceps und die Schlinge des Bizeps-Pulley-Systems sind anfällig für akute oder degenerative Läsionen. Da sie beide als wesentliche Schmerzursachen identifiziert wurden, sind eine entsprechende Diagnose und Behandlung für die erfolgreiche Therapie von Schulterschmerzen essenziell. Die grundlegenden Prinzipien zur Behandlung dieser beiden pathologischen Veränderungen haben sich zwar in den letzten Jahrzehnten nicht geändert, es wurden jedoch neue Ansätze für einfacher durchzuführende chirurgische Optionen entwickelt. Die Refixation von SLAP-Läsionen (SLAP: Superiores Labrum von anterior nach posterior) wird restriktiver gehandhabt und zumeist bei jungen Patienten durchgeführt, während eine Tenotomie oder Tenodese häufiger bei Patienten über 30 Jahren vorgenommen wird. Läsionen der langen Bizepssehne und des Pulley-Systems werden entweder mittels Tenotomie oder Tenodese behandelt. Insbesondere die chirurgischen Techniken bei der Tenodese sind bei Verwendung aktueller Implantate weniger invasiv. Dabei wird die Tenodese entweder intraartikulär, supra- oder subpektoral mit Tenodeseschrauben oder Fadenankern durchgeführt. Dagegen wurde in den letzten 10 Jahren das Verfahren der Weichteiltenodese immer seltener eingesetzt. Mit der chirurgischen Behandlung pathologischer Veränderungen der langen Bizepssehne sind hochgradig zufriedenstellende Ergebnisse möglich, wenn die Indikation sorgfältig gestellt wird.

Schlüsselwörter

Scapula Schulterschmerzen Tenotomie Tenodese Verletzungen der Rotatorenmanschette 

Abkürzungen

CHL

Ligamentum coracohumerale

LBS

Lange Bizepssehne

MGHL

Ligamentum glenohumerale mediale

PDS

Poly-p-dioxanon

SGHL

Ligamentum glenohumerale superius

SLAP

Superiores Labrum von anterior nach posterior

Modern treatment strategies for the long head of the biceps tendon

Abstract

The long head of the biceps and the biceps pulley sling are prone to acute or degenerative injury. As they both were identified as major pain generators, adequate diagnosis and treatment is vital for successful treatment of shoulder pain. Although the basic principles to address either pathology have not changed over the last decades, new trends have evolved to simplify surgical options. SLAP (superior labral tear from anterior to posterior) repair is seen more restrictive and is mostly performed in young individuals, whereas tenotomy or tenodesis are more often used in patients over 30. The long head of the biceps and pulley lesions are treated with either tenotomy or tenodesis. Surgical techniques for tenodesis are especially less invasive using current implants. Tenodesis is performed either intraarticular, supra- or subpectoral with tenodesis screws or suture anchors. Soft tissue tenodesis has become unpopular over the last decade. Surgical treatment of the long head of the biceps pathologies allows highly satisfying results if the indication is chosen thoroughly.

Keywords

Scapula Shoulder pain Tenotomy Tenodesis Rotator cuff injuries 

Notes

Einhaltung ethischer Richtlinien

Interessenkonflikt

S. Braun und A. B. Imhoff sind Berater der Firma Arthrex, München.

Dieser Beitrag beinhaltet keine von den Autoren durchgeführten Studien an Menschen oder Tieren.

Literatur

  1. 1.
    Giphart JE et al (2012) The long head of the biceps tendon has minimal effect on in vivo glenohumeral kinematics: a biplane fluoroscopy study. Am J Sports Med 40(1):202–212CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Shank JR et al (2011) A comparison of forearm supination and elbow flexion strength in patients with long head of the biceps tenotomy or tenodesis. Arthroscopy 27(1):9–16CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Snyder SJ et al (1990) SLAP lesions of the shoulder. Arthroscopy 6(4):274–279CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Andrews JR, Carson WG Jr., McLeod WD (1985) Glenoid labrum tears related to the long head of the biceps. Am J Sports Med 13(5):337–341CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Braun S, Kokmeyer D, Millett PJ (2009) Shoulder injuries in the throwing athlete. J Bone Joint Surg Am 91(4):966–978CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Burkhart SS, Morgan CD (1998) The peel-back mechanism: its role in producing and extending posterior type II SLAP lesions and its effect on SLAP repair rehabilitation. Arthroscopy 14(6):637–640CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Morgan CD et al (1998) Type II SLAP lesions: three subtypes and their relationships to superior instability and rotator cuff tears. Arthroscopy 14(6):553–565CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Virk MS, Nicholson GP (2016) Complications of proximal biceps tenotomy and tenodesis. Clin Sports Med 35(1):181–188CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Werner BC et al (2014) Arthroscopic suprapectoral and open subpectoral biceps tenodesis: a comparison of minimum 2‑year clinical outcomes. Am J Sports Med 42(11):2583–2590CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Beirer M et al (2017) Concomitant intra-articular glenohumeral injuries in displaced fractures of the lateral clavicle. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 25(10):3237–3241CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Tischer T et al (2009) Incidence of associated injuries with acute acromioclavicular joint dislocations types III through V. Am J Sports Med 37(1):136–139CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Maffet MW, Gartsman GM, Moseley B (1995) Superior labrum-biceps tendon complex lesions of the shoulder. Am J Sports Med 23(1):93–98CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Alpantaki K et al (2005) Sympathetic and sensory neural elements in the tendon of the long head of the biceps. J Bone Joint Surg Am 87(7):1580–1583PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Boileau P, Ahrens PM, Hatzidakis AM (2004) Entrapment of the long head of the biceps tendon: the hourglass biceps – a cause of pain and locking of the shoulder. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 13(3):249–257CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Braun S et al (2010) Biomechanical evaluation of shear force vectors leading to injury of the biceps reflection pulley: a biplane fluoroscopy study on cadaveric shoulders. Am J Sports Med 38(5):1015–1024CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Gwinner C, Moroder P, Gerhardt C, Scheibel M (2016) Management von Redefekten der Rotatorenmanschette. Obere Extremität 11:228–238.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11678-016-0384-y CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Werner A et al (2000) The stabilizing sling for the long head of the biceps tendon in the rotator cuff interval. A histoanatomic study. Am J Sports Med 28(1):28–31CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Bennett WF (2001) Subscapularis, medial, and lateral head coracohumeral ligament insertion anatomy. Arthroscopic appearance and incidence of „hidden“ rotator interval lesions. Arthroscopy 17(2):173–180CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Braun S et al (2011) Lesions of the biceps pulley. Am J Sports Med 39(4):790–795CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Walch G et al (1998) Subluxations and dislocations of the tendon of the long head of the biceps. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 7(2):100–108CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Walch G et al (1994) Tears of the supraspinatus tendon associated with „hidden“ lesions of the rotator interval. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 3(6):353–360CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Habermeyer P et al (2004) Anterosuperior impingement of the shoulder as a result of pulley lesions: a prospective arthroscopic study. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 13(1):5–12CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Vangsness CT Jr. et al (1994) The origin of the long head of the biceps from the scapula and glenoid labrum. An anatomical study of 100 shoulders. J Bone Joint Surg Br 76(6):951–954PubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Bennett WF (2003) Arthroscopic repair of isolated subscapularis tears: a prospective cohort with 2‑ to 4‑year follow-up. Arthroscopy 19(2):131–143CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Maier D et al (2007) Stabilization of the long head of the biceps tendon in the context of early repair of traumatic subscapularis tendon tears. J Bone Joint Surg Am 89(8):1763–1769CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Lopez-Vidriero E et al (2010) Biomechanical evaluation of 2 arthroscopic biceps tenodeses: double-anchor versus percutaneous intra-articular transtendon (PITT) techniques. Am J Sports Med 38(1):146–152CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Ambacher T et al (1999) Muscle strength after surgical treatment of ruptures of the long biceps tendon by refixation to the short head. Sportverletz Sportschaden 13(4):90–95CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Scheibel M et al (2011) Arthroscopic soft tissue tenodesis versus bony fixation anchor tenodesis of the long head of the biceps tendon. Am J Sports Med 39(5):1046–1052CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Mazzocca AD et al (2005) Subpectoral biceps tenodesis with interference screw fixation. Arthroscopy 21(7):896CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Braun S, Minzlaff P, Imhoff AB (2012) Subpectoral tenodesis of the long head of the biceps tendon for pathologies of the long head of the biceps tendon and the biceps pulley. Oper Orthop Traumatol 24(6):479–485CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Buchholz A et al (2013) Biomechanical comparison of intramedullary cortical button fixation and interference screw technique for subpectoral biceps tenodesis. Arthroscopy 29(5):845–853CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Millett PJ et al (2008) Interference screw vs. suture anchor fixation for open subpectoral biceps tenodesis: does it matter? BMC Musculoskelet Disord 9:121CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Sears BW, Spencer EE, Getz CL (2011) Humeral fracture following subpectoral biceps tenodesis in 2 active, healthy patients. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 20(6):e7–11CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Rhee PC et al (2013) Iatrogenic brachial plexus injuries associated with open subpectoral biceps tenodesis: a report of 4 cases. Am J Sports Med 41(9):2048–2053CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Denard PJ et al (2012) Anatomy of the biceps tendon: implications for restoring physiological length-tension relation during biceps tenodesis with interference screw fixation. Arthroscopy 28(10):1352–1358CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Galdi B et al (2016) Patients have strong preferences and perceptions for biceps tenotomy versus tenodesis. Arthroscopy 32(12):2444–2450CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Green JM et al (2017) All-arthroscopic suprapectoral versus open subpectoraltenodesis of the long head of the biceps Brachii without the use of interference screws. Arthroscopy 33(1):19–25CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Tahal DS et al (2017) Subpectoral biceps tenodesis for tenosynovitis of the long head of the biceps in active patients younger than 45 years old. Arthroscopy 33(6):1124–1130CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Pogorzelski J et al (2017) Subpectoral biceps tenodesis for treatment of isolated type II SLAP lesions in a young and active population. Arthroscopy.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arthro.2017.07.021 Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Vap AR et al (2017) Isolated biceps reflection pulley tears treated with subpectoral biceps tenodesis: minimum 2‑year outcomes. Arthroscopy 33(10):1788–1794CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Chalmers PN et al (2017) Incidence and return to play after biceps tenodesis in professional baseball players. Arthroscopy.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arthro.2017.08.251 Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Fedoriw WW et al (2014) Return to play after treatment of superior labral tears in professional baseball players. Am J Sports Med 42(5):1155–1160CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Ek ET et al (2014) Surgical treatment of isolated type II superior labrum anterior-posterior (SLAP) lesions: repair versus biceps tenodesis. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 23(7):1059–1065CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Denard PJ et al (2014) Arthroscopic biceps tenodesis compared with repair of isolated type II SLAP lesions in patients older than 35 years. Orthopedics 37(3):e292–7CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Medizin Verlag GmbH, ein Teil von Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Gelenkpunkt – Sport- und Gelenkchirurgie InnsbruckInnsbruckÖsterreich
  2. 2.SportorthopädieTU MünchenMünchenDeutschland

Personalised recommendations