Purpose: The aim of our study is to compare the modified double incision (DI) with bone tunnel reinsertion with the single-incision (SI) double tension slide technique in terms of clinical and functional outcomes and complication rates.
Methods: A retrospective comparative analysis was performed on 65 patients treated for total distal biceps tendon rupture. The surgical technique adopted for each patient was based on the preference of two experienced elbow surgeons. The DASH and MAYO questionnaires, functional outcome and ROM were recorded in all subjects.
Results: Of 65 patients, we collected data of a cohort of 54 distal biceps tendon ruptures that satisfied inclusion criteria. Twenty-five were treated by modified DI and 29 SI techniques. The recovery of the complete ROM in terms of flexion/extension and prono-supination occurred in the 79.6% of the patients, without statistical significant difference between the adopted technique. We reported a complication rate of 12% and 20.7% for DI and SI techniques, respectively, without statistical correlation (P = 0.84). The average DASH score was similar for DI and SI techniques without significant differences (P = 0,848). The Mayo score results were excellent in the majority of the patients. No significant difference in MAYO results was reported comparing the surgical techniques (P = 1).
Conclusion: Both techniques provide a reliable and strong repair with an optimal recovery of ROM returning to preinjury activity with substantially overlapping timelines.
Keywords: Complications; Distal biceps tendon rupture; Double-incision technique; Functional and clinical outcome; Range of motion; Single-incision technique.
© 2021. The Author(s).