SynthesisEuropean journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie2025
Higher complication rate is associated with suprapectoral biceps tenodesis as compared to subpectoral tenodesis: a systematic review and meta-analysis of comparative studies.
Synthesis in European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Treatment options for long head of biceps tendon tenodesis.Frontiers in surgery · 2026Review
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionBiceps tenodesis techniques can be grouped into open or arthroscopic according to surgical approach, and into subpectoral or suprapectoral according to location of fixation. The purpose of this meta-analysis is to critically analyse the current evidence with regard to comparing two methods of biceps tenodesis, viz subpectoral vs supratenodesis.
methodsPrimary electronic search was conducted on MEDLINE (PubMed), Embase, Scopus, and Cochrane Library databases for published literature from year of inception to August 2024. The current review included any prospective or retrospective English studies that evaluated the outcomes of suprapectoral versus subpectoral. Primary outcomes of interest were American shoulder and elbow society (ASES) score, constant score (CS), UCLA score, SST score, VAS, and complications. The secondary outcomes of interest was range of movements.
resultsThirteen studies were included in our quantitative analysis, comprising three RCTs and ten non-randomized comparative studies. ASES score was slightly higher in most of studies in favour of subpectoral tenodesis [95% CI (- 1.35, 0.10); I
conclusionBoth the techniques of biceps tenodesis have shown comparable functional outcomes in most of the trials. On performing meta-analysis, suprapectoral tenodesis was associated with higher rate postoperative complications. Hence, it is advisable to choose subpectoral tenodesis, as and when possible.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39998641What 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.