2021 ISAKOS Biennial Congress Paper
Superior Labrum Anterior-Posterior (Slap) Repair Versus Subpectoral Biceps Tenodesis For Isolated Slap II Lesions In Overhead Athletes Aged Younger 35 Years: A Comparison Of Minimum Two-Year Outcomes
Lucca Lacheta, MD, München GERMANY
Marilee P. Horan, MPH, Vail, CO UNITED STATES
Travis Dekker, MD, Niceville, Florida UNITED STATES
Brandon Goldenberg, MD, Vail, Colorado UNITED STATES
Grant J Dornan, MS, Vail, CO UNITED STATES
Peter J. Millett, MD, MSc, Vail, CO UNITED STATES
Steadman Philippon Research Institute, Vail, Colorado, UNITED STATES
FDA Status Not Applicable
Summary
Both techniques of SLAP repair and subpectoral biceps tenodesis provide excellent clinical results with high return to overhead sports rate and low failure rate in a young and high-demanding patient cohort for the treatment of isolated SLAP type II lesions
Abstract
Objectives:
To evaluate clinical outcomes and return to sports rates in overhead athletes aged younger than 35 years suffering from symptomatic SLAP type II lesions who have undergone either biceps tenodesis or SLAP repair.
Methods
A retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data was performed in patients who underwent subpectoral biceps tenodesis (group I) or SLAP repair (group II) for the treatment of isolated SLAP type II lesions, were younger than 35 years at time of surgery, participated in overhead sports, and were at least two years out from surgery. Clinical outcomes were assessed by the use of the American Shoulder and Elbow Society Score (ASES), Single Assessment Numerical Evaluation Score (SANE), Quick Disabilities of the Arm, and Shoulder and Hand Score (QuickDASH) and the General Health SF-12 physical component. Return to sports and patient satisfaction were documented. Clinical failures requiring revision surgery and complications were reported.
Results
Minimum 2-year follow-up was obtained in 12/14 (85.7%) patients in group I and in 23/27 (85%) patients in group II. Preoperative baseline scores between both groups showed no significant differences (p > 0.05). When group I was compared to group II, no significant differences in postoperative outcome scores were detected (p > 0.05). For biceps tenodesis (Group 1) vs SLAP repair (Group II): ASES score was mean 91.6 ± 11.3 vs 88.6 ± 16.9, SANE score was mean 77.5 ± 28.0 vs. 82.3 ± 24.4, QuickDASH score was mean 9.2± 12.2 vs 9.4 ± 14.5, and SF-12 was mean 52.0 ± 6.1 vs 52.6 ± 7.8. No difference in return to sports rate (91% vs 91%, p > .05) was noted. 1 patient in group I and 2 patients in group II failed.
Conclusion
This study showed that both techniques of SLAP repair and subpectoral biceps tenodesis provide excellent clinical results with high return to overhead sports rate and low failure rate in a young and high-demanding patient cohort for the treatment of isolated SLAP type II lesions.