ArticleJSES reviews, reports, and techniques2025
Surgical treatment of long head of biceps pathology: analyzing trends in the United States from 2010 to 2019.
Article in JSES reviews, reports, and techniques, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Intra-articular Double-Anchor Double-Loop Figure-of-Eight Transtendon Long Head of the Biceps Tendon Tenodesis.Arthroscopy techniques · 2025Article
- Comparison of isolated tenotomy vs. tenotomy with tenodesis for long head of biceps tendon in middle-aged and elderly patients undergoing rotator cuff repair: a retrospective study.Frontiers in surgery · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The long head of the biceps tendon (LHBT) is a common cause of anterior shoulder pain. A symptomatic LHBT is commonly encountered in the setting of a rotator cuff tear. The purpose of this study was to determine trends in the incidence of isolated tenotomy and tenodesis procedures for symptomatic LHBT in the setting of rotator cuff repairs (RCR). Methods: The MarketScan database was queried from 2010 to 2019 for biceps tenotomy (open) and tenodesis (open and arthroscopic) in the United States. Annual procedure volumes and incidences were calculated using discharge weights and U.S. Census Bureau data, respectively. Further subgroup analysis included age, gender, and region. Results: Open tenodesis remained the most common procedure in the United States for isolated LHBT management. Its incidence increased by 180% from 2010 to 2019, accounting for 49% of isolated LHBT procedures by 2019. In the setting of RCR, arthroscopic tenodesis was most common, and its incidence grew by 138%. By 2019, arthroscopic tenodesis accounted for 58% of procedures in the setting of RCR, while tenotomy claimed only 2%. The incidence of all procedures increased for the age ≥65 cohort, with a notable 828% increase in the incidence of open tenodesis as an isolated procedure, accounting for 76% of procedures by 2019. Conclusion: Volumes of procedures aimed to ameliorate LHBT pathology increased from 2010 to 2019. Open tenodesis remained the preferred procedure for isolated LHBT pathology, while arthroscopic tenodesis was preferred in the setting of concomitant RCR. Future research can develop algorithmic approaches to treating biceps pathology.
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.