LOGIN
AAOS 2016: Arthroscopic proximal versus open subpectoral biceps tenodesis
March 2016
AAOS 2016: Arthroscopic proximal versus open subpectoral biceps tenodesis
Study Type:Randomized Trial
OE Level Evidence:N/A
Journal Level of Evidence:N/A
Prospective Randomized Study of Arthroscopic Proximal vs. Open Subpectoral Biceps Tenodesis: Is One Better?
Did you know you're eligible to earn 0.5 CME credits for reading this report? Click Here
CONFERENCE ACE REPORTS
This ACE Report is a summary of a conference presentation or abstract. The information provided has limited the ability to provide an accurate assessment of the risk of bias or the overall quality. Please interpret the results with caution as trials may be in progress and select results may have been presented.
Synopsis
129 patients scheduled for biceps tenodesis were randomized to either an arthroscopic proximal approach or open subpectoral approach. The purpose of this study was to compared pain, function, and complications between the two groups. Follow-up was performed for an average of 11.3 months postoperatively. Results demonstrated that patients in both study groups significantly improved from baseline me...
To view the full content, login to your account,
or start your 30-day FREE Trial today.
FREE TRIAL
LOGIN
Forgot Password?
Explore some of our unlocked ACE Reports below!
Learn about our AI Driven
High Impact Search Feature
Our AI driven High Impact metric calculates the impact an article will have by considering both the publishing journal and the content of the article itself. Built using the latest advances in natural language processing, OE High Impact predicts an article’s future number of citations better than impact factor alone.
Continue
Join the Conversation
Please Login or Join to leave comments.