2017 ISAKOS Biennial Congress ePoster #409

 

Endobutton Versus Anchors Suture Repair of Distal Biceps Rupture Using an Anterior Approach: A Comparison Series of 41 Cases

Yacine Carlier, MD, Mérignac FRANCE
BORDEAUX MERIGNAC SPORT CLINIC, MERIGNAC, FRANCE

FDA Status Cleared

Summary

Reinsertion of the distal biceps on the radial tuberosity is the gold standard for recovering an optimal function of the elbow. However, the method of fixation remains debated. The aim of our study was to evaluate the results of the repair of distal biceps rupture of the brachial with fixation anchors versus EndoButton

ePosters will be available shortly before Congress

Abstract

Introduction

Reinsertion of the distal biceps on the radial tuberosity is the gold standard for recovering an optimal function of the elbow. However, the method of fixation remains debated. The aim of our study was to compare the results of the repair of distal biceps rupture with fixation by anchors versus EndoButton

Methods

Between January 2014 and October 2015, 42 patients, all male, were operated for a distal biceps tendon rupture. The reinsertion was performed in 11 cases using anchors (group A), in 30 cases using EndoButton (group B) and in 1 case by brachial tenodesis. All patients were evaluated at 6 months follow-up using VAS, Quickdash and MEPS scores. Range of motion and strength were also analysed. The results of the 2 groups were compared (Student test for continuous variables and chi-2 for categorical variables).

Results

Group A included 11 patients, mean age 45 years (41.5 to 50), 6 smokers (54.5%), 6 work accidents (54.5%). Group B included 30 patients, mean age 48 years (45-51), 17 smokers (56.6%), 12 work accidents (40%).

The analysis of group A and B, respectively found a mean operative delay of 19 (14-25) and 18 (15-22) days, and an operative time of a 37 and 33 minutes.

At 6 months follow-up, the scores were respectively : VAS 0.63 and 0.67, QuickDash 4.95 and 6.23, and MEPS 94.5 and 94.8.
The average range of motion were respectively 138.2° and 139.2° of flexion and complete extension for both group. Average pronation 85.9° and 86 °, supination 87° and 85.6 °.
The strength compared to the opposite side was 95.9% and 95.5% in flexion and 85.9% and 87.4% in supination.
The mean delay to return to work was 4 (2.5-5.6) and 3.5 (3-4) months respectively.
Radiographic control did not found any heterotopic ossification in group A and 1 case in group B.

There were 2 complications (18.2%) in group A (1 CRPS and 1 biceps cramp) and 6 (20%) in group B (1 biceps cramp, 2 ulnar acroparesthesia, 1 hypoesthesia antebrachiale and 2 CRPS)

There was no statistically significant difference between the two groups

Conclusion

Reinsertion of the distal biceps by EndoButton or anchors gives similar results which allow very good functional recovery of elbow and a rapid return to normal activities