Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Clinical and sonographic evaluation of Endobutton distal biceps brachii tendon repair: what constitutes normal post-operative appearances?

  • Scientific Article
  • Published:
Skeletal Radiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Objective

Distal biceps brachii tendon (DBBT) rupture is an uncommon but functionally significant injury given the loss of supination, flexion strength and pain that often result. Prompt surgical repair is preferred in most patients. Clinicoradiological post-operative follow-up is typically performed to assess DBBT repair integrity and function, frequently using ultrasound, though to date, no studies have described post-operative DBBT repair sonographic appearances. The purpose of this study was to evaluate post-operative DBBT sonographic appearances in the context of Endobutton repair with the following aims:

  1. i.

    Establish typical ultrasound appearances 12 months post-surgery

  2. ii.

    Establish the relationship between ultrasound appearances and clinical/functional outcomes.

Materials and methods

Sixty patients between February 2016 and October 2017 undergoing DBBT repair were prospectively recruited, all undergoing clinical and sonographic assessment 12 months post-surgery. Ultrasound data was collected on tendon integrity, tendon calibre and presence of intratendinous calcification, peritendinous fluid and peritendinous soft tissue/scarring. Clinical data was collected on active range of motion (ROM) (flexion, extension, supination, pronation) and strength (flexion and supination).

Results

A total of 57/60 patients had intact DBBT repairs identified sonographically and clinically at 12 months. DBBT repairs had significantly increased cross-sectional area (mean 260%, 95% CI: 217%, 303%) compared with non-operated DBBT. Ninety-three percent of DBBT repairs were hypoechoic. Thirty percent contained intratendinous calcification. Peritendinous fluid/soft tissue was rarely observed. There was no significant correlation between DBBT calibre and strength/ROM parameters.

Conclusion

Normal post-operative sonographic appearances of Endobutton DBBT repair comprise a hypoechoic tendon significantly increased in calibre compared with non-operated tendon ± intratendinous calcification. DBBT repair calibre varies greatly, but is not associated with any significant difference in strength/ROM.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Mazzocca AD, Spang JT, Arciero RA. Distal biceps rupture. Orthop Clin N Am. 2008;39:237–49.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Morrey BF, Askew LJ, An KN, Dobyns JH. Rupture of the distal tendon of the biceps brachii. A biomechanical study. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1985;67:418–21.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Baker BE, Bierwagen D. Rupture of the distal tendon of the biceps brachii. Operative versus non-operative treatment. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1985;67:414–7.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Safran MR, Graham SM. Distal biceps tendon ruptures: incidence, demographics, and the effect of smoking. Clin Orthop Rel Res. 2002;404:275–83.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Vidal AF, Drakos MC, Allen AA. Biceps tendon and triceps tendon injuries. Clin Sports Med. 2004;23:707–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Rineer CA, Ruch DS. Elbow tendinopathy and tendon ruptures: epicondylitis, biceps and triceps ruptures. J Hand Surg. 2009;34:566–76.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Bain GI, Prem H, Heptinstall RJ, Verhellen R, Paix D. Repair of distal biceps tendon rupture: a new technique using the Endobutton. J Shoulder Elb Surg. 2000;9:120–6.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Sutton KN, Dodds SD, Ahmad AS, Sethi PM. Surgical treatment of distal biceps rupture. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2010;18:139–48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Kelly EW, Steinmann S, O’Driscoll SW. Surgical treatment of partial distal biceps tendon ruptures through a single posterior incision. J Shoulder Elb Surg. 2003;12:456–61.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Marshall NE, Keller RA, Okoroha K, et al. Radiostereometric evaluation of tendon elongation after distal biceps repair. Orthop J Sports Med. 2016;4(11):2325967116672620.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Legg AJ, Stevens R, Oakes NO, Shahane SA. A comparison of nonoperative vs. Endobutton repair of distal biceps ruptures. J Shoulder Elb Surg. 2016;25:341–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Snir N, Hamula M, Wolfson T, Meislin R, Strauss EJ, Jazrawi LM. Clinical outcomes after chronic distal biceps reconstruction with allografts. Am J Sports Med. 2013;41:2288–95.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Hinchey JW, Aronowitz JG, Sanchez-Sotelo J, Morrey BF. Re-rupture rate of primarily repaired distal biceps tendon injuries. J Shoulder Elb Surg. 2014;23:850–4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Suda AJ, Prajitno J, Grützner PA, Tinelli M. Good isometric and isokinetic power restoration after distal biceps tendon repair with anchors. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2017;137:939–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Jockel CR, Mulieri PJ, Belsky MR, Leslie BM. Distal biceps tendon tears in women. J Shoulder Elb Surg. 2010;19:645–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Alemann G, Dietsch E, Gallinet D, Obert L. Repair of distal biceps brachii tendon assessed with 3-T magnetic resonance imaging and correlation with functional outcome. Skelet Radiol. 2015;44:629–39.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Schmidt CC, Diaz VA, Weir DM, Latona CR, Miller MC. Repaired distal biceps magnetic resonance imaging anatomy compared with outcome. J Should Elb Surg Am Should Elb Surg. 2012;21:1623–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Marnitz T, Spiegel D, Hug K, et al. MR imaging findings in flexed abducted supinated (FABS) position and clinical presentation following refixation of distal biceps tendon rupture using bioabsorbable suture anchors. Rofo. 2012;184:432–6.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Roger B, Saillant G. Imagerie par résonance magnétique du tendon patellaire opéré Getroa Opus XXX: Sauramps Medical. 2003:389–94.

  20. Maffulli N, Thorpe AP, Smith EW. Magnetic resonance imaging after operative repair of Achilles tendon rupture. Scand J Med Sci Sports. 2001;11:156–62.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Walton C, Li Z, Pennings A, Agur A, Elmaraghy A. A 3-dimensional anatomic study of the distal biceps tendon: implications for surgical repair and reconstruction. Orthop J Sports Med. 2015;3(6):2325967115585113. https://doi.org/10.1177/2325967115585113.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  22. Freeman CR, McCormick KR, Mahoney D, Baratz M, Lubahn JD, Nesterenko S. Nonoperative treatment of distal biceps tendon ruptures compared with a historical control group. Elbow strength and endurance in patients with a ruptured distal biceps tendon. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2009;91:2329–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Nesterenko S, Domire ZJ, Morrey BF, Sanchez-Sotelo J. Elbow strength and endurance in patients with a ruptured distal biceps tendon. J Should Elb Surg Am Should Elb Surg. 2010;19:184–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Thomopoulos S, Williams GR, Soslowsky LJ. Tendon to bone healing: differences in biomechanical, structural, and compositional properties due to a range of activity levels. J Biomech Eng. 2003;125:106–13.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Caekebeke P, Vermeersch N, Duerinckx J, van Riet R. Radiological and clinical evaluation of the transosseous cortical button technique in distal biceps tendon repair. J Hand Surg Am. 2016;41:e447–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Potapov A, Laflamme YG, Gagnon S, Canet F, Rouleau DM. Progressive osteolysis of the radius after distal biceps tendon repair with the bioabsorbable screw. J Shoulder Elb Surg. 2011;20:819–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Mazzocca AD, Burton KJ, Romeo AA, Santangelo S, Adams DA, Arciero RA. Biomechanical evaluation of 4 techniques of distal biceps brachii tendon repair. Am J Sports Med. 2007;35:252–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Spang JT, Weinhold PS, Karas SG. A biomechanical comparison of EndoButton versus suture anchor repair of distal biceps tendon injuries. J Shoulder Elb Surg. 2006;15:509–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors thank the MSK radiologists, sonographers and Medical Imaging Consultants (MIC), Edmonton, Canada for their contributions.

Funding

The study was sponsored by the Workers Compensation Board—Alberta.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Consortia

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Ramin Mandegaran or Sukhvinder Dhillon.

Ethics declarations

Ethical approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Declaration of Helsinki and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare no further conflicts of interest.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Mandegaran, R., Crowther, S., Jhangri, G.S. et al. Clinical and sonographic evaluation of Endobutton distal biceps brachii tendon repair: what constitutes normal post-operative appearances?. Skeletal Radiol 49, 1081–1088 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00256-020-03384-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00256-020-03384-1

Keywords

Navigation