FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2982225876> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W2982225876 endingPage "337" @default.
• W2982225876 startingPage "328" @default.
• W2982225876 abstract "ImportanceThere are many different ways to fix the long head of biceps (LHB) tendon to the proximal humerus but there is still no consensus about clinical outcomes on how each fixation technique relates to biceps tenodesis.ObjectiveThe purpose of this review was to systematically review subjective outcomes, patient and physical driven and surgical complications following tenodesis of the LHB tendon comparing different fixation techniques.Evidence reviewA systematic search for articles on the biceps tenodesis technique with reports of at least one in three aspect outcomes was carried out from January 2013 to November 2018. PubMed, Embase and the Cochrane Library were the databases used for the literature review. The different surgical methods were compared by the number of studies that had significantly improved mean postoperative scores compared with preoperative scores. Besides this, the means of postoperative subjective outcome (Visual Analogue Scale for pain), and patient and physical driven (American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Score and the Constant-Murley Score) scores were also reported. Additionally, the complication rate of each technique was evaluated.FindingsFifty studies out of 761 were included. The interference screw fixation without tie over screw, interference screw fixation with tie over screw, single anchor suture, knotless anchor suture and soft tissue tenodesis techniques had more than one study that reported significant improvement in postoperative subjective, patient and physical driven scores compared with preoperative scores. There was no significant difference in clinical outcomes of the interference screw without tie over screw compared with the single anchor suture and interference screw with tie over screw techniques. Soft tissue tenodesis, single anchor suture and knotless anchor suture showed higher complication rates in comparison with other methods.Conclusion and relevanceAll five techniques mentioned above (interference screw fixation without tie over screw, interference screw fixation with tie over screw, single anchor suture, knotless anchor suture and soft tissue tenodesis) provided significant improvement in subjective outcomes, and patient and physical driven outcomes compared with the preoperative status. The soft tissue tenodesis, single anchor suture and knotless anchor suture techniques showed higher complication rates in comparison with other methods.Level of evidenceLevel IV. There are many different ways to fix the long head of biceps (LHB) tendon to the proximal humerus but there is still no consensus about clinical outcomes on how each fixation technique relates to biceps tenodesis. The purpose of this review was to systematically review subjective outcomes, patient and physical driven and surgical complications following tenodesis of the LHB tendon comparing different fixation techniques. A systematic search for articles on the biceps tenodesis technique with reports of at least one in three aspect outcomes was carried out from January 2013 to November 2018. PubMed, Embase and the Cochrane Library were the databases used for the literature review. The different surgical methods were compared by the number of studies that had significantly improved mean postoperative scores compared with preoperative scores. Besides this, the means of postoperative subjective outcome (Visual Analogue Scale for pain), and patient and physical driven (American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Score and the Constant-Murley Score) scores were also reported. Additionally, the complication rate of each technique was evaluated. Fifty studies out of 761 were included. The interference screw fixation without tie over screw, interference screw fixation with tie over screw, single anchor suture, knotless anchor suture and soft tissue tenodesis techniques had more than one study that reported significant improvement in postoperative subjective, patient and physical driven scores compared with preoperative scores. There was no significant difference in clinical outcomes of the interference screw without tie over screw compared with the single anchor suture and interference screw with tie over screw techniques. Soft tissue tenodesis, single anchor suture and knotless anchor suture showed higher complication rates in comparison with other methods. All five techniques mentioned above (interference screw fixation without tie over screw, interference screw fixation with tie over screw, single anchor suture, knotless anchor suture and soft tissue tenodesis) provided significant improvement in subjective outcomes, and patient and physical driven outcomes compared with the preoperative status. The soft tissue tenodesis, single anchor suture and knotless anchor suture techniques showed higher complication rates in comparison with other methods." @default.
• W2982225876 created "2019-11-01" @default.
• W2982225876 creator A5002678802 @default.
• W2982225876 creator A5050500801 @default.
• W2982225876 creator A5060927025 @default.
• W2982225876 creator A5062210370 @default.
• W2982225876 creator A5063246921 @default.
• W2982225876 date "2019-11-01" @default.
• W2982225876 modified "2023-09-25" @default.
• W2982225876 title "Similar clinical outcomes of biceps tenodesis with various kinds of fixation techniques: a systematic review" @default.
• W2982225876 cites W1526124302 @default.
• W2982225876 cites W1795483423 @default.
• W2982225876 cites W1804710293 @default.
• W2982225876 cites W1826568388 @default.
• W2982225876 cites W1969575435 @default.
• W2982225876 cites W1975868975 @default.
• W2982225876 cites W1989410719 @default.
• W2982225876 cites W2000038088 @default.
• W2982225876 cites W2014998534 @default.
• W2982225876 cites W2016433258 @default.
• W2982225876 cites W2017044005 @default.
• W2982225876 cites W2018237082 @default.
• W2982225876 cites W2024445107 @default.
• W2982225876 cites W2069097172 @default.
• W2982225876 cites W2069777685 @default.
• W2982225876 cites W2079394853 @default.
• W2982225876 cites W2103240828 @default.
• W2982225876 cites W2107903738 @default.
• W2982225876 cites W2119844842 @default.
• W2982225876 cites W2129984689 @default.
• W2982225876 cites W2136321671 @default.
• W2982225876 cites W2171736643 @default.
• W2982225876 cites W2196776041 @default.
• W2982225876 cites W2200596503 @default.
• W2982225876 cites W2249094956 @default.
• W2982225876 cites W2253788607 @default.
• W2982225876 cites W2261447584 @default.
• W2982225876 cites W2286305980 @default.
• W2982225876 cites W2312527759 @default.
• W2982225876 cites W2316399855 @default.
• W2982225876 cites W2345872031 @default.
• W2982225876 cites W2346956889 @default.
• W2982225876 cites W2362009322 @default.
• W2982225876 cites W2405254384 @default.
• W2982225876 cites W2416985409 @default.
• W2982225876 cites W2468996569 @default.
• W2982225876 cites W2512109910 @default.
• W2982225876 cites W2521533654 @default.
• W2982225876 cites W2535566991 @default.
• W2982225876 cites W2560969325 @default.
• W2982225876 cites W2576440140 @default.
• W2982225876 cites W2604281559 @default.
• W2982225876 cites W2613675964 @default.
• W2982225876 cites W2624667969 @default.
• W2982225876 cites W2728881156 @default.
• W2982225876 cites W2752459497 @default.
• W2982225876 cites W2752497319 @default.
• W2982225876 cites W2755998757 @default.
• W2982225876 cites W2766983932 @default.
• W2982225876 cites W2768070690 @default.
• W2982225876 cites W2803815505 @default.
• W2982225876 cites W2809792638 @default.
• W2982225876 cites W4250354043 @default.
• W2982225876 cites W4253092965 @default.
• W2982225876 cites W566687075 @default.
• W2982225876 doi "https://doi.org/10.1136/jisakos-2019-000275" @default.
• W2982225876 hasPublicationYear "2019" @default.
• W2982225876 type Work @default.
• W2982225876 sameAs 2982225876 @default.
• W2982225876 citedByCount "1" @default.
• W2982225876 countsByYear W29822258762021 @default.
• W2982225876 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W2982225876 hasAuthorship W2982225876A5002678802 @default.
• W2982225876 hasAuthorship W2982225876A5050500801 @default.
• W2982225876 hasAuthorship W2982225876A5060927025 @default.
• W2982225876 hasAuthorship W2982225876A5062210370 @default.
• W2982225876 hasAuthorship W2982225876A5063246921 @default.
• W2982225876 hasBestOaLocation W29822258761 @default.
• W2982225876 hasConcept C141071460 @default.
• W2982225876 hasConcept C146249460 @default.
• W2982225876 hasConcept C168563851 @default.
• W2982225876 hasConcept C2776478404 @default.
• W2982225876 hasConcept C2780105995 @default.
• W2982225876 hasConcept C2781425419 @default.
• W2982225876 hasConcept C2908647359 @default.
• W2982225876 hasConcept C71924100 @default.
• W2982225876 hasConcept C99454951 @default.
• W2982225876 hasConceptScore W2982225876C141071460 @default.
• W2982225876 hasConceptScore W2982225876C146249460 @default.
• W2982225876 hasConceptScore W2982225876C168563851 @default.
• W2982225876 hasConceptScore W2982225876C2776478404 @default.
• W2982225876 hasConceptScore W2982225876C2780105995 @default.
• W2982225876 hasConceptScore W2982225876C2781425419 @default.
• W2982225876 hasConceptScore W2982225876C2908647359 @default.
• W2982225876 hasConceptScore W2982225876C71924100 @default.
• W2982225876 hasConceptScore W2982225876C99454951 @default.
• W2982225876 hasIssue "6" @default.
• W2982225876 hasLocation W29822258761 @default.

• next