Management of proximal biceps tendon pathology

The long head of the biceps tendon is widely recognized as an important pain generator,especially in anterior shoulder pain and dysfunction with athletes and working individuals.The purpose of this review is to provide a current understanding of the long head of the biceps tendon anatomy and its surrounding structures,function,and relevant clinical information such as evaluation,treatment options,and complications in hopes of helping orthopaedic surgeons counsel their patients.An understanding of the long head of the biceps tendon anatomy and its surrounding structures is helpful to determine normal function as well as pathologic injuries that stem proximally.The biceps-labral complex has been identified and broken down into different regions that can further enhance a physician’s knowledge of common anterior shoulder pain etiologies.Although various physical examination maneuvers exist meant to localize the anterior shoulder pain,the lack of specificity requires orthopaedic surgeons to rely on patient history,advanced imaging,and diagnostic injections in order to determine the patient’s next steps.Nonsurgical treatment options such as anti-inflammatory medications,physical therapy,and ultrasound-guided corticosteroid injections should be utilized before entertaining surgical treatment options.If surgery is needed,the three options include biceps tenotomy,biceps tenodesis,or superior labrum anterior to posterior repair.Specifically for biceps tenodesis,recent studies have analyzed open vs arthroscopic techniques,the ideal location of tenodesis with intra-articular,suprapectoral,subpectoral,extra-articular top of groove,and extra-articular bottom of groove approaches,and the best method of fixation using interference screws,suture anchors,or cortical buttons.Orthopaedic surgeons should be aware of the complications of each procedure and respond accordingly for each patient.Once treated,patients often have good to excellent clinical outcomes and low rates of complications.

Return to work following shoulder arthroplasty:A systematic review

BACKGROUND Many patients prioritize the ability to return to work(RTW)after shoulder replacement surgeries such as total shoulder arthroplasty(TSA),reverse TSA(rTSA),and shoulder hemiarthroplasty(HA).Due to satisfactory clinical and functional long-term outcomes,the number of shoulder replacements performed will continue to rise into this next decade.With younger individuals who compose a significant amount of the workforce receiving shoulder replacements,patients will begin to place a higher priority on their ability to RTW following shoulder arthroplasty.AIM To summarize RTW outcomes following TSA,rTSA,and HA,and analyze the effects of workers’compensation status on RTW rates and ability.METHODS This systematic review and analysis was performed in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines.A literature search regarding RTW following shoulder arthroplasty was performed using four databases(PubMed,Scopus,Embase,and Cochrane Library),and the Reference Citation Analysis(https://www.referencecitationanalysis.com/).All studies in English relevant to shoulder arthroplasty and RTW through January 2021 that had a level of evidence I to IV were included.Nonclinical studies,literature reviews,case reports,and those not reporting on RTW after shoulder arthroplasty were excluded.RESULTS The majority of patients undergoing TSA,rTSA,or HA were able to RTW betweenone to four months,depending on work demand stratification.While sedentary or light demand jobs generally have higher rates of RTW,moderate or heavy demand jobs tend to have poorer rates of return.The rates of RTW following TSA(71%-93%)were consistently higher than those reported for HA(69%-82%)and rTSA(56%-65%).Furthermore,workers’compensation status negatively influenced clinical outcomes following shoulder arthroplasty.Through a pooled means analysis,we proposed guidelines for the average time to RTW after TSA,rTSA,and HA.For TSA,rTSA,and HA,the average time to RTW regardless of work demand stratification was 1.93±3.74 mo,2.3±2.4 mo,and 2.29±3.66 mo,respectively.CONCLUSION The majority of patients are able to RTW following shoulder arthroplasty.Understanding outcomes for rates of RTW following shoulder arthroplasty would assist in managing expectations in clinical practice.

Fragility of statistically significant findings from randomized clinical trials of surgical treatment of humeral shaft fractures:A systematic review

BACKGROUND Despite recent meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials(RCTs),there remains no consensus regarding the preferred surgical treatment for humeral shaft fractures.The fragility index(FI)is an emerging tool used to evaluate the robustness of RCTs by quantifying the number of participants in a study group that would need to switch outcomes in order to reverse the study conclusions.AIM To investigate the fragility index of randomized control trials assessing outcomes of operative fixation in proximal humerus fractures.METHODS We completed a systematic review of RCTs evaluating the surgical treatment of humeral shaft fractures.Inclusion criteria included:articles published in English;patients randomized and allotted in 1:1 ratio to 2 parallel arms;and dichotomous outcome variables.The FI was calculated for total complications,each complication individually,and secondary surgeries using the Fisher exact test,as previously published.RESULTS Fifteen RCTs were included in the analysis comparing open reduction plate osteosynthesis with dynamic compression plate or locking compression plate,intramedullary nail,and minimally invasive plate osteosynthesis.The median FI was 0 for all parameters analyzed.Regarding individual outcomes,the FI was 0 for 81/91(89%)of outcomes.The FI exceeded the number lost to follow up in only 2/91(2%)outcomes.CONCLUSION The FI shows that data from RCTs regarding operative treatment of humeral shaft fractures are fragile and does not demonstrate superiority of any particular surgical technique.