Aims. The conventionally described mechanism of distal biceps tendon rupture (DBTR) is of a ‘considerable extension force suddenly applied to a resisting, actively flexed forearm’. This has been commonly paraphrased as an ‘eccentric contracture to a flexed elbow’. Both definitions have been frequently used in the literature with little objective analysis or citation. The aim of the present study was to use video footage of real time distal biceps ruptures to revisit and objectively define the mechanism of injury. Methods. An online search identified 61 videos reporting a DBTR. Videos were independently reviewed by three surgeons to assess forearm rotation, elbow flexion, shoulder position, and type of muscle contraction being exerted at the time of rupture. Prospective data on mechanism of injury and arm position was also collected concurrently for 22 consecutive patients diagnosed with an acute DBTR in order to corroborate the video analysis. Results. Four videos were excluded, leaving 57 for final analysis. Mechanisms of injury included deadlift, bicep curls, calisthenics, arm wrestling, heavy lifting, and boxing. In all, 98% of ruptures occurred with the arm in supination and 89% occurred at 0° to 10° of elbow flexion. Regarding muscle activity, 88% occurred during isometric contraction, 7% during eccentric contraction, and 5% during concentric contraction. Interobserver correlation scores were calculated as 0.66 to 0.89 using the free-marginal Fleiss Kappa tool. The prospectively collected patient data was consistent with the video analysis, with 82% of injuries occurring in supination and 95% in relative elbow extension. Conclusion. Contrary to the classically described injury mechanism, in this study the usual arm position during DBTR was forearm supination and elbow extension, and the muscle contraction was typically isometric. This was demonstrated for both video analysis and ‘real’ patients across a range of activities leading to rupture. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2022;3(10):826–831

Repair of distal biceps tendon rupture is a subject that has received increasing attention in the past decade. In the active individual who desires as close to normal function as possible, repair of biceps tendon is recommended. The author describes a tehnique with a single anterior incision and fixation with superanchors. This method was successfully used in 25 patients with excellent functional results. There were no failures and no complications of neurological injury. The single anterior incision approach in which superanchors are used is recommended as an alternative to the traditional two-incision method. The Biceps brachii is an important flexor of the elbow and is the main supinator of the forearm. Avulsion of its distal tendon insertion is rare injury that mostly affects middle-aged men. It represents only 3% of all biceps tendon ruptures. There is an average of 1.24 spontaneous complete distal biceps ruptures per 100,000 people per year. The decline in the number of distal biceps tendon ruptures with increasing age correlates with a decrease in at-risk activities after the fourth decade of life. Decreased vascularity, tendon impingement, degenerative changes of the distal biceps tendon and the use of anabolic steroids have been postulated to predispose to tendon rupture. Our study shows that repair of distal biceps tendon ruptures using superanchors is safe and gives clinically objective and functional results similar to bone tunnel fixation. We had no major complications, no suture anchor failures and no occurrence of synostosis and neurological injuries. We recommend the use of superanchors for the treatment of distal biceps tendon ruptures

Previous studies describing drill trajectory for single incision distal biceps tendon repair suggest aiming ulnar and distal (Lo et al). This suggests that the starting point of the drill would be anterior and radial to the anatomic insertion of the distal biceps tendon. Restoration of the anatomic footprint may be important for restoration of normal strength, especially as full supination is approached. To determine the safest drill trajectory for preventing injury to the posterior interosseous nerve (PIN) when repairing the distal biceps tendon to the ANATOMIC footprint through a single-incision anterior approach utilising cortical button fixation. Through an anterior approach in ten cadaveric specimens, three drill holes were made in the radial tuberosity from the centre of the anatomic footprint with the forearm fully supinated. Holes were made in a 30º distal, transverse and 30º proximal direction. Each hole was made by angling the trajectory from an anterior to posterior and ulnar to radial direction leaving adequate bone on the ulnar side to accommodate an eight-millimetre tunnel. Proximity of each drill trajectory to the PIN was determined by making a second incision on the dorsum of the proximal forearm. A K-wire was passed through each hole and the distance between the PIN and K-wire measured for each trajectory. The PIN was closest to the trajectory K-wires drilled 30° distally (mean distance 5.4 mm), contacting the K-wire in three cases. The transverse drill trajectory resulted in contact with the PIN in one case (mean distance 7.6 mm). The proximal drill trajectory appeared safest with no PIN contact (mean distance 13.3 mm). This was statistically significant with a Friedman statistic of 15.05 (p value of 0.00054). When drilling from the anatomic footprint of the distal biceps tendon the PIN is furthest from a drill trajectory aimed proximally. The drill is aimed radially to minimise blowing out the ulnar cortex of the radius. For any reader inquiries, please contact . vansurgdoc@gmail.com

Aim: The biceps brachii is an important elbow flexor and is the main supinator of the forearm. Avulsion of its distal tendon insertion is an uncommon injury and even more uncommon is the partial tear of this tendon. The rupture typically occurs at its attachment to the radial tuberosity. Nonoperative treatment of these injuries has been described, but significant weakness in flexion and supination or persistent pain may occur. Most authors recommend acute anatomic repair to improve function or relieve pain. Material and Method: Twenty-five ruptures of the distal biceps tendon were operated at our institution from 1992 to 1997. Twenty-three of the patients were male and 2 female. The dominant extremity was involved in 21 patients. Their average age was 48 years (range, 30–59). Eighteen ruptures were complete, 8 of them were acute, while 10 were chronic, as were the 7 partial ruptures. Three patients with complete rupture and all the patients with partial rupture had a MRI. In 2 chronic patients an anatomic repair was impossible and they were treated with a biceps-to-brachialis transfer. These patients were not included in the final follow-up. All other tendons were repaired anatomically through use of a single anterior incision and bone suture anchors. Follow-up averaged 36 months (range, 12–53 months). At final follow-up subjective and objective data were collected. Patients were questioned about their activity level, job status, and satisfaction at outcome. Elbow range of motion, strength and power were compared with those for the uninjured side while each value was adjusted for dominance and expressed as a percentage of the uninjured side. Results: All patients returned to their preinjury level of activity and employment by 6 months after surgery. All patients reported that they were satisfied with the result and would undergo the surgery again. The entire group of patients averaged 9.8% more flexion strength and 2.4% less supination strength for the repaired elbow that for the uninvolved elbow. Range of motion was normal in 20 patients. Three patients lacked 10° of extension and one of them lacked 10° of pronation. No patient experienced transient or permanent nerve deficit. None of the patients complained of pain or tenderness. There was no evidence of heterotopic ossification or change in the position of the suture anchors. Conclusion: The one incision technique with bone suture anchors is a safe and reliable technique for the treatment of complete or partial distal biceps tendon ruptures with very good results referring to restoration of flexion and supination strength and minimal complication rate

Distal biceps tendon ruptures are uncommon with a reported incidence of 1.24 per 100,000 per year. They typically occur in males in the fourth decade. Operative treatment has been shown to improve functional outcomes in the treatment of distal biceps tendon ruptures. A variety of surgical techniques have been described, usually using the dual incision Boyd-Anderson approach. We report a series of 10 patients with 10 tendon ruptures treated using a single incision volar approach and using the Arthrex Biotenodesis screw to reattach the tendon to the radial tuberosity. This method has been previously described in only one case report. All ten patients underwent clinical assessment using the Mayo Elbow Performance Score (MEPS) and functional assessment using the DASH scoring system. The power was assessed isokinetically using the Nottingham Myometer. Based on the MEPS and DASH grading system all patients achieved a good or excellent result. In our experience reattachment of the distal biceps tendon using a single incision approach and Arthrex Biotenodesis screw is a new technique which gives a good functional outcome

Purpose: Anatomic repair of an acute distal biceps tear has been demonstrated to improve flexion and supination strength compared with conservative treatment. The most commonly used fixation methods for a distal biceps tendon repair include suture anchors, bioabsorbable screws, and endobutton. The goal of this study was to. perform a radiologic evaluation of bioabsorbable screw tunnel osteolysis and. retrospectively review bioabsorbable-screw related clinical complications. Method: We included twenty (20) consecutive patients who underwent primary anatomic repair of the distal biceps tendon since 2005. We used a 7x23mm biote-nodesis. ®. screw (Arthrex) in 18 cases, and 8x23mm and 8x12mm screws in the other two cases. First, from the x-ray view done in the immediate postoperative period showing the complete screw tunnel, we measured the ratio of the volume of the bone tunnel to the volume of the radius bone section. A mathematical formula for cylindrical volume was used (¶ x r2 x h). We used a relation between two volumes rather than the tunnel volume itself for scaling purposes. Secondly, we calculated the same relation on the x-ray from the last follow-up. We then obtained the percentage of tunnel enlargement by relating the volumetric ratio from the first x-ray to the ratio from the last x-ray. Afterwards, we performed a retrospective chart review noting any bioabsorbable screw-related and postoperative complications. Results: In the group, the average age was forty-six (46) years. All subjects were male. Eighteen (18) cases were acute complete ruptures operated in the first three weeks, one case was a partial rupture and one case was chronic (one year). The average follow up was eighteen (18) months. We found that the average initial relative volume occupied by the screw tunnel was 47 % of the bone section. At the last follow-up, this volume increased to 68%. After our chart review, we found that one patient presented with a broken screw and increased pain and that another patient developed a severe foreign-body reaction with re-rupture of the tendon requiring three reoperations. Conclusion: The use of a bioabsorbable screw for distal biceps tendon fixation results in significant osteolysis of the radial bone at short term follow-up. Consequences of osteolysis in the radius are worrisome since iatro-genic fractures are more likely to occur. Osteolysis can be secondary to an inflammatory reaction to the screw material, bone necrosis secondary to pressure or initial thermal necrosis. We also noted two cases of severe bio-tenodesis screw-related complications among our series of twenty (20) patients. These results call into question the use of the bioabsorbable screw in distal biceps tendon repair and are important to present. Exact volume of bone loss using 3D computed tomography scan analysis as well as quality of life questionnaires and strength testing will be available for presentation

Acute distal biceps tendon repair reduces fatigue-related pain and minimises loss of forearm supination and elbow flexion strength. We report the short- and long-term outcome following repair using an EndoButton technique. Between 2010 – 2018, 102 patients (101 males; mean age 43 years) underwent acute (□6 weeks) distal biceps tendon repair using an EndoButton technique. The primary short-term outcome was complications. The primary long-term outcome was the Quick-DASH (Q-DASH). Secondary outcomes included the Oxford Elbow Score (OES), EuroQol-5D-3L (EQ-5D), return to function and satisfaction. At mean short-term follow-up of 4 months (2.0 – 55.5) eight patients (7.8%) experienced a major complication and 34 patients (33.3%) experienced a minor complication. Major complications included re-rupture (n=3, 2.9%), unrecovered nerve injury (n=4, 3.9%) and surgery for heterotopic ossification excision (n=1, 1.0%). Three patients (2.9%) required surgery for a complication. Minor complications included neuropraxia (n=27, 26.5%) and superficial infection (n=7, 6.9%). At mean follow-up of 5 years (1 – 9.8) outcomes were collected from 86 patients (84.3%). The median Q-DASH, OES, EQ-5D and satisfaction scores were 1.2 (IQR 0 – 5.1), 48 (IQR, 46 – 48), 0.80 (IQR, 0.72 – 1.0) and 100/100 (IQR, 90 – 100) respectively. Most patients returned to sport (82.3%) and employment (97.6%) following surgery. Unrecovered nerve injury was associated with a poor outcome according to the Q-DASH (p< 0.001), although re-rupture and further surgery were not (p > 0.05). Acute distal biceps tendon repair using an EndoButton technique results in excellent patient reported outcomes and health-related quality of life. Although rare, unrecovered nerve injury adversely affects outcome

Introduction: Proximal radio-ulnar synostosis is a rare complication after distal biceps tendon repair. Synostosis results in usually painfree limitation of forearm rotation and loss of function. The outcome after synostosis excision has not been demonstrated. Methods: Between 1987 and 2003 twelve patients were identified with radio-ulnar synostosis and retrospectively reviewed clinically and radiographically. All patients initially experienced a complete distal biceps tendon rupture after lifting heavy objects. The average time to repair was fourteen days. Results: These twelve patients underwent excision of synostosis as early as two months post repair and as late as 18 months. The average age at time of excision was forty-five years and the dominant arm involved in seven patients. All received postoperative idomethacin for four weeks and only six received additional postoperative irradiation. The average follow-up was fifty-nine months. Function revealed an average pre-operative rotational arc of 19, six patients were ankylosed in a neutral position. The postoperative arc was 138 (p = 0.007). Flexion and extension was essentially normal preoperatively and postoperatively. All twelve patients demonstrated no pain pre- and postoperatively. All patients were very satisfied with the result. There were no complications after excision. Radiographically there was no recurrence of ectopic bone formation. Discussion and Conclusion: Excision of proximal radio-ulnar synostosis following distal biceps repair results in a significant improvement of limited forearm rotation and returning patients to a pain free functional rotational arc with a high satisfaction rate

Introduction and objective: Distal biceps tendon ruptures commonly occur in the dominant arm of male between 40 and 60 years of age. The degenerative tendon avulses from the radial tuberosity. Conservative treatment results in decreased flexion and supination strength. Surgical reattachment is the treatment of choice and several surgical approaches and fixation devices have been proposed. The purpose of this study was to compare the results of two different techniques. Materials and Methods: Twenty-four consecutive patients with distal biceps tendon ruptures were randomly assigned to one of two treatment groups: 12 using 2 biodegradable anchors through a modified 2-incision technique (group A) and 12 patients underwent distal biceps repair using an Endobutton. ®. (Acufex Smith & Nephew, Andover MA) using a single transverse anterior incision (group B). All patients were male. Average age was 40 (33–57) in groupA and 42 (29–59) in group B. The rupture was located in the dominant arm in 6 patients in groupA and 7 in group B. The interval between injury and surgery was similar in both groups (< 12 days). Postoperative protocol and rehabilitation was the same in both groups. Full range of motion as tolerated was allowed two week after surgery. Active range of motion, Mayo Elbow Performance Score (MEPS), pain, strength (Dexter isokinetic testing), patient satisfaction, operative time and elbow radiographs were evaluated at 12 months postoperatively. The mean follow-up was 17 months (range, 12–34). Results: Average operative time (minutes):50 (group A) and 42 (group B). There were no complications in group B. Two patients in group A had a transient posterior interosseous nerve neurapraxia with spontaneous full recovery after 3 months, and other one developed symptomatic heterotopic bone formation and synostosis was resected. There was no statistical significant difference in MEPS score, range of motion, time to return to work or strength between both groups. All patients in both groups were satisfied with their final result and eventually returned to their pre-injury activity level without sequelae after 12.2 (group A) and 10.3 (group B) weeks. Conclusion: Functional results of the two techniques studied were similar. Anterior approach showed lesser complications and less time off work than 2-incision technique. Endobutton. ®. single approach assisted tecnique should be considered the gold standard procedure for distal biceps tendon repair due to its shorter operative time and lower morbidity. However, we need series with a longer follow-up to confirm these results

Introduction. Tendon ruptures are a common injury and often require surgical intervention to heal. A refixation is commonly performed with high-strength suture material. However, slipping of the thread is unavoidable even at 7 knots potentially leading to reduced compression of the sutured tendon at its footprint. This study aimed to evaluate the biomechanical properties and effectiveness of a novel dynamic high-strength suture, featuring self-tightening properties. Method. Distal biceps tendon rupture tenotomies and subsequent repairs were performed in sixteen paired human forearms using either conventional or the novel dynamic high-strength sutures in a paired design. Each tendon repair utilized an intramedullary biceps button for radial fixation. Biomechanical testing aimed to simulate an aggressive postoperative rehabilitation protocol stressing the repaired constructs. For that purpose, each specimen underwent in nine sequential days a daily mobilization over 300 cycles under 0-50 N loading, followed by a final destructive test. Result. After the ninth day of cyclic loading, specimens treated with the dynamic suture exhibited significantly less tendon elongation at both proximal and distal measurement sites (-0.569±2.734 mm and 0.681±1.871 mm) compared to the conventional suture group (4.506±2.169 mm and 3.575±1.716 mm), p=0.003/p<0.002. Gap formation at the bone-tendon interface was significantly lower following suturing using dynamic suture (2.0±1.6 mm) compared to conventional suture (4.5±2.2 mm), p=0.04. The maximum load at failure was similar in both treatment groups (dynamic suture: 374± 159 N; conventional suture: 379± 154 N), p=0.925. The predominant failure mechanism was breakout of the button from the bone (dynamic suture: 5/8; conventional suture: 6/8), followed by suture rupturing, suture unraveling and tendon cut-through. Conclusion. From a biomechanical perspective, the novel dynamic high-strength suture demonstrated higher resistance against gap formation at the bone tendon interface compared to the conventional suture, which may contribute to better postoperative tendon integrity and potentially quicker functional recovery in the clinical setting

Purpose: The purpose is to evaluate the clinical outcome of patients who underwent excision of motion-limiting radioulnar heterotopic ossification (HO) as a complication of a distal biceps tendon repair. The hypothesis is that there are no measurable clinical losses that persist after excision. Method: Between 1996 and 2005, eight consecutive patients were identified. All were treated with heterotopic ossification excision using a standard surgical technique, a single dose of postoperative radiation, four weeks of indomethacin, and a standard rehabilitation protocol. These individuals were studied and compared to a matched cohort of eight patients who underwent a distal biceps tendon repair with a similar surgical technique that was uncomplicated. At minimum follow-up of one year, all patients in both groups completed the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) outcomes questionnaire, were tested for range of motion in elbow flexion/extension and forearm supination/pronation, and underwent biceps isokinetic dynamometry strength testing including elbow flexion and forearm supination. Both peak strength as well as muscle fatigue were quantified. Range of motion and strength comparisons were made both between groups and side-to-side within each group. Results: There were no patients lost to follow-up. At mean follow-up of 56 months, there were no cases of nerve palsy, recurrence, or other complications. All patients in the HO group returned to their original occupation without restrictions. Mean arc of forearm rotation in this group increased from 19 to 151 degrees (p=0.01), but pronation (65 degrees) was less than the unaffected arm (p=0.01). There were no side-to-side differences in motion within the control group, or differences in peak strength or fatigue within either group. When comparing the two groups, there was a trend towards worse functional outcomes on DASH in the HO group than the controls (p=0.09). No differences were identified between the HO and control groups with respect to isokinetic torque, endurance strength or range of motion. Conclusion: When patients develop motion-limiting heterotopic ossification after distal biceps tendon repair, surgical resection can safely lead to a functional recovery of elbow and forearm strength and motion. Level III Evidence, Case-control

PURPOSE: We describe the results of 64 patients who underwent treatment for acute distal biceps tendon rupture using a single incision and suture anchors. The purpose of the study is to evaluate if this method is reliable and if it can reduse the risk of ectopic bone formation or synostosis. Methods: 64 patients underwent surgical repair for acute rupture of the distal biceps tendon, using suture anchors and a single incision. All performed by 1 surgeon. We had 63 male and 1 female with a mean age of 48 years (range 30–59). Our operative technique consisted of an “S”-shaped anterior incision centered over the antecubital fossa. After identification and protection of the lateral antebrachial cutaneous nerve, we exposed and mobilized the ruptured biceps tendon. The distal portion of the tendon was debrided and the radial tuberosity gently decorticated. A 4 stranded suture was then inserted into the tuberosity. The tendon was advanced to bone and the sutures were tied using the modification of Kessler’s technique, holding the elbow in 90° of flexion. The post-op protocol was a posterior splint for 10 days (in 90° of flexion and 20° of supination), a dynamic hinged-extension block brace in 45° for 3 weeks and progressive advancement to full extension in 3 more weeks. Strengthening exercises were permitted after 3 months. Results: All acute tears (< 3 weeks) were repaired anatomically. The follow-up period was 39 months (range 18m – 11years). Objective data consisted of ROM (range of motion) of the elbow, flexion and supination strength were measured by a BTE Work Stimulator. The ROM was normal in 54 patients, 10 patients lacked 10° of extension. 51 patients returned to their pre-injury level of activity and within 6 months returned to work. All patients reported pain relief and good recovery of strength and were completely satisfied of the outcome. There were no implant failures, nerve palsies or heterotopic bone formation. Conclusions: Use of a single incision repair with bone suture anchors provides secure fixation of distal biceps tendon to the radius with minimal volar dissection wich is associated with a minimum risk of synostosis and posterior interosseous nerve injuries. This method is reliable for acute ruptures. Return to normal strength and range of motion can be expected if tendon repair is performed before 3 weeks. The advantages of this method are less dissection for re-attachment of the tendon, less nerve injuries and no ectopic bone formation or synostosis

Introduction and Aims: Chronic distal biceps tendon ruptures have traditionally been treated with a biceps to brachialis tenodesis. The use of a semitendinosus autograft to reconstruct the distal biceps tendon for chronic rupture has been described. This study evaluates the functional outcome of a group of patients treated with autograft reconstruction. Method: This retrospective study identified six patients who underwent a late reconstruction of a biceps tendon rupture using a semitendinosis autograft. Functional outcome was evaluated objectively and subjectively. Clinical subjective evaluation included the MAYO elbow score and the outcome questionnaire from the Society of Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (SSES). Objective outcomes were assessed by measurement of peak torque for both elbow flexion and supination using a Cybex II Isokinetic machine. Comparisons were made with the opposite limb. Results: Six right-handed male patients aged 42±7 yrs (range 34–48 yrs) were evaluated in this study, five of which achieved a good to excellent MAYO performance score (average 87 ±12), and SSES score (average 86±21). Peak torque obtained during maximal elbow flexion was 44±17 Nm (vs. 55 ±16 Nm opposite elbow) during supination was 8±4Nm (vs. 10±2Nm opposite elbow). Conclusion: This study represents a series of patients with autograft reconstruction of the chronic distal biceps rupture. It is the first study to quantitatively measure the recovery of strength of elbow flexion and supination. The semitendinosus autograft provides a strong and reliable reconstructive option in the majority of patients with chronic biceps tendon ruptures. Recovery of elbow flexion and supination power is nearly normal

Distal biceps tendon avulsion requires surgical treatment but is uncommon. The average orthopedic surgeon will come across a case only occasionally. The two-incision technique of Boyd is technically difficult. One-incision methods are easier for the occasional surgeon. Methods using Mitek Bone Anchors and Endobuttons have been described in the literature. This presentation compares those techniques and a technique using anterior cruciate interference screws against the Two Incision Technique in a model consisting of sheep bone and sash cord. The models were then tested on a dynamometer to failure to assess the ultimate strength of the various methods of fixation. In this model Mitek Anchors and Endobuttons gave comparable fail points to the two Incision Technique. The Interference Screw Technique was stronger

Purpose: Complete distal biceps tendon ruptures (DBTRs) require prompt surgical management for optimal functional and aesthetic outcome. Waiting for confirmatory diagnostic imaging can often delay timely surgical referral of these injuries. The need exists for a valid and reliable diagnostic tool to expedite appropriate referrals for surgery. Method: Based on the hypothesis that complete distal biceps tendon rupture leads to an objectively measurable increase in the “biceps crease interval” (BCI) due to proximal retraction of the musculotendinous complex, three independent examiners established “normal” biceps crease intervals (N-BCI) for 80 males (average age = 43 years) with no history of biceps injury. Given acceptable inter-rater reliability (ICC > 0.70), a mean N-BCI value was established and a normal biceps crease ratio (N-BCR) between right and left arms was calculated. Correlations with arm dominance, biceps circumference, and age were determined. Diagnostic N-BCI and N-BCR thresholds were applied to 23 consecutive patients presenting with a possible complete DBTR to determine the diagnostic value of the BCI Test. A definitive diagnosis was confirmed at surgery and/or by radiographic imaging. Results: The BCI Test had acceptable inter-rater reliability (ICC= 0.794, p = < 0.001). The mean N-BCI for both dominant and non-dominant arms was 4.8 +/− 0.6 cm. The mean N-BCR was 1.0 +/− 0.1. Applied to an injured population, using a diagnostic threshold of two standard deviations above “normal” values (BCI > 6.0 cm, BCR > 1.2), the BCI Test had a sensitivity of 92% and a diagnostic accuracy of 93%. Conclusion: The BCI Test is an objective, valid and reliable test that can be used by clinicians to facilitate rapid diagnosis and surgical referral of suspected complete DBTRs

Introduction. Acute distal biceps rupture can be a devastating injury and surgical repair offers the only real chance of full recovery. We report on a new surgical technique in which the use of suture anchors and a modified de-tensioning suture was employed to protect the repair in the early post operative recovery period and aid early rehabilitation and return to full pre-injury activity. Materials & Methods. Using the standard anterior incision the distal biceps tendon was approximated to the radial tuberosity using two Mitek sutures and a sliding stitch. Using 2-0 Vicryl, de-tensioning sutures were used to attach the medial and lateral sides of the tendon to the underlying brachialis muscle. Post-operative recovery encouraged isometric contractions as early as 24 hours and after 2 weeks allowed flexion and extension with gravity eliminated. Six weeks onwards full active movement commenced with gradual increase in stretching and strengthening exercise. Results. 14 patients underwent this procedure and all returned to pre-injury activity levels within 9 months. Follow up (6–14 months) demonstrated all had regained pre-injury levels of strength in flexion and supination. Discussion. Using two suture anchors, it is suggested that load bearing strength is greater than the trans-osseous method, providing even tension is applied to both anchors. This can be achieved using a sliding stitch. De-tensioning sutures restore the isometric pull on biceps in the early phase and protects the repair. Conclusion. All cases operated on in this way have made excellent recoveries and have returned to full pre-injury levels of activity. We therefore recommend this technique as a way of enhancing rehabilitation in what can be a devastating injury for the active sporting individual

A larger radial tuberosity, and therefore a smaller radioulnar space, may cause mechanical impingement of the DBT predisposing to tear. We sought to investigate anatomic factors associated with partial DBT tears by retrospectively reviewing 3-T MRI scans of elbows with partial DBT tears and a normal elbow comparison group

3-T MRI scans of elbows with partial DBT tears and elbows with no known pathology were reviewed retrospectively by two independent observers. Basic demographic data were collected and measurements of radial tuberosity length, radial tuberosity thickness, radio-ulnar space, and radial tuberosity-ulnar space were made using simultaneous tracker lines and a standardised technique. The presence or absence of enthesophytes and the presence of a single or double DBT were noted.

26 3-T MRI scans of 26 elbows with partial DBT tears and 30 3-T MRI scans of 30 elbows without pathology were included. Basic demographic data was comparable between the two groups. The tear group showed statistically significant larger mean measurements for radial tuberosity length (24.3mm vs 21.3mm, p=0.002), and radial tuberosity thickness (5.5mm vs 3.7mm, p=<0.0001. The tear group also showed statistically significant smaller measurements for radio-ulnar space (8.2mm vs 10.0mm, p=0.010), and radial tuberosity-ulnar space (7.2mm vs 9.1mm, p=0.013). There was a statistically significant positive correlation between partial DBT tears and presence of enthesophytes (p=0.007) as well as between partial DBT tears and having two discrete DBTs rather than a single or interdigitating tendon (p=<0.0001).

Larger radial tuberosities, and smaller radio-ulnar and radial tuberosity-ulnar spaces are associated with partial DBT tears. This may be due to chronic impingement, tendon delamination and consequent weakness which ultimately leads to tears. Enthesophytes may be associated with tears for the same reason. Having two discrete DBTs that do not interdigitate prior to insertion is also associated with partial tears.

The clinical results of acute repair rupture of the biceps tendon insertion using a two incision Boyd Anderson approach in four patients are described.

Four patients underwent acute biceps tendon repair using the Boyd Anderson approach and the tendon was secured to its anatomical insertion using a number 5 non-absorbable suture. One patient was immobilised in the postoperative period and the subsequent patients were allowed early mobilisation supervised by the physiotherapist.

All patients were male and surgery was performed within three weeks of the injury. Two patients sustained injury playing rugby, one was injured lifting a bag of coal and one was injured lifting a motorised Go Kart. In all four cases the tendon was found to be avulsed from its bony insertion rather than ruptured in it’s mid substance or musculo-tendinous junction.

There were no problems with wound break down or discomfort. The patient who was immobilised took longer to regain full range of extension, pronation and supination. All patients returned to the pre-injury employment, sporting and social levels.

Our results suggest that early two incision approach and repair is associated with good functional outcome and minimal morbidity in the post operative phase.

Aim of study: The rupture of the distal brachial tendon is a relatively infrequent trauma. Our aim is to present the results of surgical confrontation of 3 recent ruptures of that tendon.

Material and method: In 2002 we faced 3 patients of age of 31,.37,.50 years with a recent rupture of distal brachial tendon. The ruptures concerned the left winger bicipital which was the not prevailing hand and happened at the effort of lifting of weight. The intervention was realised between 2nd and 10th day from the rupture. All the damage was argued by MRI. We applied the modified technique at Boyd -Anderson. The repairing of the tendon, via two sections, occured with suture Dexon No 2, via his natural passage, in the tuberositas radii. This technique was preferred in order not to cause damage to the posterior interosseous nerve.

Results: The follow up was 8–12 months from surgery. The results in all three were excellent with full range of movement and force of bending, extent, pronation, supination.

Conclusions: The results that we had lead us to the conclusion that the method of election in the young active adults is the surgical repairing of the tendon in its anatomic place.

The extracortical single-button (SB) inlay repair is one of the most preferred distal biceps tendon repair techniques. However, specific complications such as neurovascular injury and non-anatomic repairs have led to the development of techniques that utilize intracortical double-button (DB) fixation. To compare the biomechanical stability of the extracortical SB repair with the anatomical DB repair technique. Controlled laboratory study. The distal biceps tendon was transected in 18 cadaveric elbows from 9 donors. One elbow of each donor was randomly assigned to the extracortical SBor anatomical DB group. Both groups were cyclically loaded with 60N over 1000 cycles between 90° of flexion and full extension. The elbow was then fixed in 90° of flexion and the repair construct loaded to failure. Gap-formation and construct stiffness during cyclic loading, and ultimate load to failure was analysed. After 1000 cycles, the anatomical DB technique compared with the extracortical SB technique showed significantly less gap-formation (mean difference 1.2 mm; p=0.017) and significantly more construct stiffness (mean difference 31 N/mm; p=0.023). Ultimate load to failure was not significantly different comparing both groups (SB, 277 N ±92 vs. DB, 285 N ±135; p=0.859). The failure mode in the anatomical DB group was significantly different compared with the extracortical SB technique (p=0.002) and was due to fracture avulsion of the BicepsButton in 7 out of 9 specimens (vs. none in SB group). Our study shows that the intracortical DB technique produces equivalent or superior biomechanical performance to the SB technique. The DB repair technique reduces the risk of nerve injury and better restores the anatomical footprint of biceps tendon. The DB technique may offer a clinically viable alternative to the SB repair technique