ArticleExperimental and therapeutic medicine2020
Small-incision open distal subpectoral vs. arthroscopic proximal biceps tenodesis for biceps long head tendon lesions with repair of rotator cuff tears.
Article in Experimental and therapeutic medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Higher complication rate is associated with suprapectoral biceps tenodesis as compared to subpectoral tenodesis: a systematic review and meta-analysis of comparative studies.European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie · 2025Pooled it
- Onlay Versus Inlay Biceps Tenodesis for Long Head of Biceps Tendinopathy: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons. Global research & reviews · 2022Pooled it
- Arthroscopic Suprapectoral Biceps Tenodesis Below the Groove: A Surgical Technique.Arthroscopy techniques · 2025Article
- Surgical treatment of long head of biceps pathology: analyzing trends in the United States from 2010 to 2019.JSES reviews, reports, and techniques · 2025Article
- Arthroscopic intra-articular vs. subpectoral biceps tenodesis with concomitant rotator cuff repair leads to equivocal MCID achievement.JSES international · 2025Article
- Subpectoral, Suprapectoral, and Top-of-Groove Biceps Tenodesis Procedures Lead to Similar Good Clinical Outcomes: Comparison of Biceps Tenodesis Procedures.Arthroscopy, sports medicine, and rehabilitation · 2023Article
- Commentary.Shoulder & elbow · 2022Article
- Biceps Tenodesis versus Tenotomy with Fast Rehabilitation Protocol-A Functional Perspective in Chronic Tendinopathy.Journal of clinical medicine · 2020Article
- The rate and reporting of fracture after biceps tenodesis: A systematic review.Journal of orthopaedicsReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The curative effect of small-incision open distal subpectoral vs. arthroscopic proximal biceps tenodesis for lesions in the long head of the biceps tendon (LHBT) combined with rotator cuff repairs (RCR) has remained controversial. The aim of the present study was to compare the two surgical methods. A total of 71 patients who received surgical treatment for LHBT lesions accompanied by RC tears were analyzed. Following arthroscopic RCR and tendectomy of the affected LHBT, 35 patients underwent small-incision open distal subpectoral tenodesis through a small incision (the subpectoral group), while the remaining 36 patients received arthroscopic proximal tenodesis (the arthroscopic group). The surgery time and intra-operative blood loss were compared between the two groups. In addition, the clinical outcomes were evaluated using scoring systems for the functional assessment of the shoulder joint. The subpectoral group had a shorter surgery time and less intra-operative blood loss than the arthroscopic group (P<0.05). The functional scores of the two groups significantly improved as time passed (P<0.05). The subpectoral group was significantly superior to the arthroscopic group with regard to the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score at 2 weeks post-operatively and visual analog scale score at 2 weeks and 3 months post-operatively (P<0.05). Small-incision open distal subpectoral and arthroscopic proximal tenodesis were demonstrated to effectively improve the function of the shoulder joint and relieve pain caused by LHBT lesions accompanied by RCR. However, small-incision open distal subpectoral tenodesis had the additional advantage of shorter surgery time, less intra-operative bleeding and encouraging early results compared to arthroscopic proximal tenodesis. The study was registered as a clinical trial in the Chinese Trial Registry (no. ChiCTR1800015643).
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.