Crossfire Tenotomy Versus Tenodesis: Pro-tenotomy
The biceps tendon has now been recognized as an important pain generator in the shoulder , and biceps pathology occurs in up to 90% of patients presenting with rotator cuff pathology . Failure to treat biceps pathology can result in significant postoperative pain and disability. Further complicating this issue is the fact that biceps pathology can be easily missed in the bicipital groove and often is a “hidden lesion.” Proximal biceps tenodesis may not correct these problems. Tenotomy and tenodesis are the two mainstays of treatment for this pathology. Both techniques have proponents, but tenotomy has multiple advantages.
- 1.Duraldi XA, McClelland WB Jr. Face-Off: tenotomy versus tenodesis. Accessed https://www.aaos.org/AAOSNow/2017/Feb/Cover/cover01/?ssopc=1.
- 12.Gurnani N, Van Deurzen DF, Janmaat VT, Van Den Bekerom MP. Tenotomy or tenodesis for pathology of the long head of the biceps brachii: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2015.Google Scholar
- 17.Gosselin M, Brophy RH, Wright RW, Matva MJ, Smith MV. Patient preferences regarding treatment of shoulder and proximal biceps disorders. Presented AAOS 2018, New Orleans, LA.Google Scholar
- 18.Hurley E, Calvo-Gurry M, Fat DL, Mullett H. Tenodesis versus tenotomy for lesions of the long head of biceps—a systematic review and meta-analysis. Presented AAOS 2018, New Orleans, LA.Google Scholar
- 20.Narvani AA, Tongel AV, Atoun E, Levy O. The “anchor shape” technique for long head of the biceps tenotomy to avoid the popeye deformity. Arth Tech. 2013;2(2):e176–0.Google Scholar