1. The Biceps Tendon:
Tenotomy v. Tenodesis
Christopher M. Aland MD
Rothman Institute, Newtown, PA
2. Disclaimer
• I own stock in Arthrocare and Johnson and
Johnson
• I am on the Membership committee of AANA
• I have no conflicts of interest that affect my
ability to teach this course
3. What We Know--maybe
• We understand the
basics
• Debate regarding
function
• Debate regarding
treatment
4. Anatomy
• Originates from
posterior superior
labrum
• Coracohumeral, SGHL
• Tuberosities
• Rich innervation
5. Function
• Long felt to be humeral
head depressor
• Stability?
• Dynamic role
– EMG variable
6.
7. Diagnosis
• PE is sensitive, not
specific
• Variety of tests
– Yergasons
– Speeds
– Subscap lift off
• MRI
• Dx at surgery
13. Tenodesis
• Soft/ semi soft
– Involves suturing to
rotator cuff
– Suture anchors
– Conjoint tendon
– Pectoralis major
– May not be much
different that tenotomy
15. Socket with Screw
• Variety of systems
• Essentially creating
socket and using
interference screw, or
push-lock type device
• Burkhart (2012) has
quantified length
relationship
– 25 mm
16. Sub pectoral
• Small incision
• Good for chronic tears
• Length tension
relationship important
• Burkhart (2012)
– 15 mm from MT junction
– Suture 2cm above lower
margin
17. Results
• Systemic review by
Slenker et al. (2012)
– No consensus
– Few controlled trials
– Cosmesis only signif. diff
• Most studies fail to
show significant
difference
– Steadman
• Arthroscopy 1/2011
18. Discussion
• If tear is less than 50%,
debridement
• Greater than 50%, over
sixty, tenotomy
• Younger, high demand,
tenodesis
– Bony procedures have
higher rate of success