ReviewArthroscopy, sports medicine, and rehabilitation2022
Lower Reoperation and Higher Return-to-Sport Rates After Biceps Tenodesis Versus SLAP Repair in Young Patients: A Systematic Review.
Review in Arthroscopy, sports medicine, and rehabilitation, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Loop versus anchor tenodesis of the long head of the biceps tendon: a prospective randomized controlled pilot study.Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery · 2026Trial
- Suprapectoral Biceps Tenodesis for Isolated SLAP Tears in Competitive Athletes Yields High Return to Sport Rates: Prospective Cohort Study of 50 Athletes.Indian journal of orthopaedics · 2025Article
- Comparison of clinical outcomes and return to sport between unicortical versus bicortical button fixation techniques for subpectoral biceps tenodesis.European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie · 2024Article
- Establishing Clinical Significance for Patients Undergoing Arthroscopic Repair of Type II SLAP Lesions.Orthopaedic journal of sports medicine · 2024Article
- Return to Sports and Clinical Results After All-Arthroscopic Biceps Tenodesis Using a 2.7-mm Knotless PEEK Suture Anchor.Orthopaedic journal of sports medicine · 2024Article
- Poor Psychological Readiness Inhibits Return to Play Following Operative Management of Superior-Labrum Anterior-Posterior Tears.Arthroscopy, sports medicine, and rehabilitation · 2023Article
- SLAP Repair Versus Biceps Tenodesis in Patients Younger Than 40 Years: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis.Orthopaedic journal of sports medicine · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: To evaluate patient-reported outcomes, return to sport, and adverse events after SLAP repair versus biceps tenodesis (BT) in a young patient population undergoing treatment of SLAP tears. Methods: We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of the PubMed (MEDLINE), Scopus, CENTRAL (Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials), and Web of Science databases for comparative studies discussing outcomes after SLAP repair and BT in patients younger than 40 years with at least 1 year of follow-up. Results: Four studies were included, comprising a total of 274 patients who underwent treatment of SLAP tears with SLAP repair (169 patients) or BT (105 patients). Most patients were male patients (79.8%) and athletes (74.5%). Preoperative and postoperative pain visual analog scale scores decreased similarly in both groups (range, 6.6-6.7 preoperatively to 0.8-2.6 postoperatively in SLAP repair group vs 5.6-7.3 preoperatively to 0.7-1.9 postoperatively in BT group). Similar and substantial American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Standardized Shoulder Assessment score increases were observed after both procedures (range, 40.6-45.8 preoperatively to 75.4-92.0 postoperatively in SLAP repair vs 41.9-55.0 preoperatively to 85.7-91.2 postoperatively in BT group). Patient satisfaction rates were similar but showed slightly higher ranges after BT (8.5-8.8 vs 8.0-8.2). Rates of return to sport were higher after BT (63%-85% vs 50%-76%), with higher odds of returning to sport after BT reported by all studies. Surgical complications were rare after SLAP repair and BT. Rates of reoperation were substantially higher after SLAP repair (3%-15% vs 0%-6%), with 3 of 4 studies reporting no reoperations after BT. BT comprised 78% to 100% of reoperation procedures after SLAP repair. Conclusions: Postoperative pain, function, and patient satisfaction were similar after SLAP repair and BT in patients younger than 40 years. There are higher rates of reoperation and lower rates of return to sport after SLAP repair than after BT. Level of Evidence: Level III, systematic review of Level III studies.
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.