Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40486765›Full record

ArticleJSES international2025

Arthroscopic intra-articular vs. subpectoral biceps tenodesis with concomitant rotator cuff repair leads to equivocal MCID achievement.

Dylan N Greif, Hashim J F Shaikh, Devon E Anderson, Robert Bronstein, Gregg T Nicandri, Brian D Giordano, Ilya Voloshin, Michael D Maloney, Sandeep Mannava

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in JSES international, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Dylan N GreifDepartment of Orthopaedics & Physical Performance, University of Rochester Medical Center, Rochester, NY, USA.
Hashim J F ShaikhDepartment of Orthopaedics & Physical Performance, University of Rochester Medical Center, Rochester, NY, USA.
Devon E AndersonDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Duke University, Durham, NC, USA.
Robert BronsteinDepartment of Orthopaedics & Physical Performance, University of Rochester Medical Center, Rochester, NY, USA.
Gregg T NicandriDepartment of Orthopaedics & Physical Performance, University of Rochester Medical Center, Rochester, NY, USA.
Brian D GiordanoDepartment of Orthopaedics & Physical Performance, University of Rochester Medical Center, Rochester, NY, USA.
Ilya VoloshinDepartment of Orthopaedics & Physical Performance, University of Rochester Medical Center, Rochester, NY, USA.
Michael D MaloneyDepartment of Orthopaedics & Physical Performance, University of Rochester Medical Center, Rochester, NY, USA.
Sandeep MannavaDepartment of Orthopaedics & Physical Performance, University of Rochester Medical Center, Rochester, NY, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Pathologies involving the long head of the biceps brachii tendon often accompany rotator cuff tears, contributing to increased physical pain. Disagreement exists in the literature regarding the outcomes of open subpectoral vs. arthroscopic biceps tenodesis during concomitant arthroscopic rotator cuff repair (ARCR), with limited studies assessing Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) in this context. This study aims to evaluate a cohort undergoing open subpectoral vs. arthroscopic intra-articular biceps tenodesis with concomitant ARCR, examining differences in PROMIS outcomes and the ability to achieve a minimal clinically important difference (MCID). We hypothesize there is not a significant difference in attaining MCID for PROMIS outcomes between open subpectoral and arthroscopic intra-articular biceps tenodesis during ARCR. Methods: A retrospective analysis was conducted on patients undergoing ARCR with concurrent biceps tenodesis. Patient-reported outcomes, including PROMIS Depression, Pain Interference, and Physical Function scores, were retrospectively reviewed. The patient cohort was stratified into two groups based on the type of biceps tenodesis performed. MCID was defined as half the standard deviation of the average preoperative scores for each cohort. Regression analysis was performed to control for the influence of confounding variables. Statistical significance was determined at a Results: A total of 197 patients were included for final data analysis. 100 patients underwent arthroscopic biceps tenodesis and 97 patients who underwent open biceps tenodesis, with average follow-up 2.39 vs. 2.21 years, respectively. Bivariate analysis showed no significant differences between subpectoral and arthroscopic cohorts in demographic or clinical variables. Both groups exhibited significant improvement at the final follow-up in all three PROMIS domains without statistically significant intergroup differences. Multivariate analysis identified racial and insurance disparities in preoperative scores but not in postoperative outcomes. Logistic regression indicated PROMIS domains and anchor usage predicted MCID, with no significant difference based on biceps tenodesis type. Conclusion: This study suggests that open subpectoral vs. arthroscopic intra-articular biceps tenodesis during concomitant ARCR does not significantly impact PROMIS outcomes or the likelihood of achieving MCID.

Indexed as

Arthroscopic procedureBiceps tenodesisMinimal clinically important differenceOutcomePROMISRotator cuff tearShoulder

Identifiers

PMID40486765
PMCPMC12144937

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.