Home > Riviste > Journal of Radiological Review > Fascicoli precedenti > Journal of Radiological Review 2022 March;9(1) > Journal of Radiological Review 2022 March;9(1):9-12



Opzioni di pubblicazione
Per abbonarsi
Segnala alla tua biblioteca


Publication history
Per citare questo articolo



Journal of Radiological Review 2022 March;9(1):9-12

DOI: 10.23736/S2723-9284.21.00139-0


lingua: Inglese

Distal biceps head brachii rupture: clinical and radiological RM comparison between two surgical techniques

Alexander DI FRANCESCO 1, Filippo FIORI 2, Luigi ZUGARO 2, Leonardo BIZZARRI 3, Enrica LIACI 3 , Francesco BIZZARRI 3

1 Unit of Orthopedic and Trauma, San Salvatore Hospital, L’Aquila, Italy; 2 Unit of Radiology, San Salvatore Hospital, L’Aquila, Italy; 3 Department of Applied Clinical Sciences and Biotechnology, University of L’Aquila, L’Aquila, Italy

BACKGROUND: Rupture of the distal biceps brachial results in significant weakness and limitation of function in those affected. Acute ruptures of the biceps tendon are generally best treated with early repair, ideally within 3 weeks of injury. The goal of this study was to compare the clinical and MR outcomes of nonabsorbable suture anchor in contrast to two-incision bone tunnel fixation.
METHODS: A retrospective cohort study of 23 patients after surgical reinsertion of the distal biceps brachial tendon with the use of nonabsorbable suture anchor (group I, N.=12) or two-incision bone tunnel fixation (group II, N.=11). The outcomes assessed were mayo elbow performance score (MEPS) and MR cross sectional area measurements.
RESULTS: Average follow-up was 12 months. MRI evaluation was performed on average 6 months after surgery, considering cross-sectional area at the distal insertion at the level of the radial tuberosity and the specific mefs. There was not statistically significant difference in age or average length of follow-up between groups. Meps was 98.7 in the group 1 (P=0.29) vs. 95.9 in group 2 (P=0.34).
CONCLUSIONS: Both surgical techniques led to adequate restoration of strength with a low complication rate. It is important to note that both techniques are safe to perform and should be guided by surgeon comfort with the correct approach; moreover, it is important to note that regardless of the technique used, the best results occur on the major cross-sectional area measurements.

KEY WORDS: Tendons; Surgical procedures, operative; Rupture

inizio pagina