Abstract
Recent literature has demonstrated that conventional arthroscopic techniques do not adequately visualise areas of predilection of pathology of the long head of biceps (LHB) tendon and are associated with a 30–50% rate of missed diagnoses. The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety, effectiveness and ease of performing biceps tenoscopy as a novel strategy for reducing the rate of missed diagnoses.
Five forequarter amputation cadaver specimens were studied. The pressure in the anterior compartment was measured before and after surgical evaluation. Diagnostic glenohumeral arthroscopy was performed and the biceps tendon was tagged to mark the maximum length visualised by pulling the tendon into the joint. Biceps tenoscopy was performed using 3 different techniques (1. Flexible video-endoscopy, 2. Standard arthroscopy via Neviaser portal. 3. Standard arthroscope via antero-superior portal with retrograde instrumentation). Each was assessed for safety, ease of the procedure and whether the full length of the extra-articular part of the LHB tendon could be visualised. The t-test was used to compare the length of the LHB tendon visualised at standard glenohumeral arthroscopy vs that visualised at biceps tenoscopy. An open dissection was performed after the arthroscopic procedures to evaluate for an iatrogenic injury to local structures.
Biceps tenoscopy allowed visualisation to the musculotendinous junction in all cases. The mean length of the tendon visualised was therefore significantly greater at biceps tenoscopy (104 mm) than at standard glenohumeral arthroscopy (33 mm) (mean difference 71 mm, p<0.0001). Biceps tenoscopy was safe with regards to compartment syndrome and there was no difference between pre- and post-operative pressure measurements (mean difference 0 mmHg, p=1). No iatrogenic injuries were identified at open dissection.
Biceps tenoscopy allows excellent visualisation of the entire length of the LHB tendon and therefore has the potential to reduce the rate of missed diagnoses. This study did not demonstrate any risk of iatrogenic injury to important local structures or any risk of compartment syndrome. Clinical evaluation is required to further validate this technique.
