Editorial Commentary: Aim High or Go Low? Outcomes Are Equivalent for Arthroscopic Suprapectoral and Mini-open Subpectoral Biceps Tenodesis.

Clicks: 242
ID: 73441
2020
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality Improving Quality
0.0 /100
Combines engagement data with AI-assessed academic quality
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Abstract
The contemporary management of biceps-labral pathology has increasingly transitioned toward primary treatment of the long head of the biceps tendon, largely in response to more consistent outcomes relative to SLAP repair and so-called benign neglect. Accordingly, there has been renewed interest in evaluating relevant differences between varying operative techniques and constructs for biceps tenodesis, including an array of subacromial, intra-articular, suprapectoral, and subpectoral methods. Among these, arthroscopic suprapectoral tenodesis and mini-open subpectoral tenodesis remain in contention for "best in show," albeit with distinctly different merits and risks. Important considerations with either technique include restoration of the native length-tension relation, avoidance of perioperative complications, surgical-site morbidity, and technical ease. Dogma aside, surgeons facile with both techniques can confidently counsel their patients on the comparable short-term results after suprapectoral or subpectoral biceps tenodesis.
Reference Key
gowd2020editorialarthroscopy Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
Authors Gowd, Anirudh K;Beck, Edward C;Waterman, Brian R;
Journal Arthroscopy : the journal of arthroscopic & related surgery : official publication of the Arthroscopy Association of North America and the International Arthroscopy Association
Year 2020
DOI
S0749-8063(19)30722-4
URL
Keywords

Citations

No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org

No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.