ArticleCureus2026
A Retrospective Cohort Study of Distal Biceps Brachii Tendon Rupture and Subsequent Repair Methods: A Comparison of Two Combined Treatment Pathways.
Article in Cureus, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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 Distal biceps brachii tendon rupture is an uncommon injury that is predominantly caused by excessive eccentric force to a flexed elbow. Operative repair is generally preferred to restore function, with a variety of surgical fixation techniques and postoperative rehabilitation protocols currently employed but with no clear consensus regarding the optimal approach. Comparative evidence evaluating surgical techniques remains limited. Objective The objective of this study is to compare two combined treatment pathways for distal biceps tendon repair using postoperative complications such as rerupture rates to compare postoperative outcomes to complication profiles. Methods All patients undergoing distal biceps repair in a single center in Wales, United Kingdom, between 2018 and 2022 were included. Patients were operated on by one of two surgeons. Information was gathered from electronic patient records and radiographic images. Demographics including age, gender, hand dominance, occupation, the mechanism of injury, and surgical intervention were recorded. Clinic letters were reviewed to determine the incidence of postoperative function and complications. Results Forty-four men were included with a median age of 45 years. All patients reported eccentric contraction as their mechanism of injury. The injury affected the dominant upper limb in all 44 patients (100%). The median time to surgery after imaging was 24 days. In the Surgeon 1 cohort, lateral cutaneous nerve (LCN) numbness was documented in 15 patients (50.0%) and elbow stiffness in six patients (20.0%). In the Surgeon 2 cohort, LCN paresthesia occurred in four patients (28.6%), stiffness in three patients (21.4%), and superficial radial nerve (SRN) paresthesia in two patients (14.3%). One patient required a revision of their biceps tendon repair (2%). All but one patient in each cohort achieved complete functional resolution by three months postoperatively. Conclusions The operative management of distal biceps rupture in this unit demonstrates similar postoperative outcomes from both treatment pathways.
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.