Management of Partial-Thickness Tears of the Distal Bicep Tendon: Evaluation of 111 Patients With 10-Year Follow-up

Adam J Tagliero; Sara E Till; Ryan R Wilbur; Bryant M Song; Anna K Reinholz; Adam C Johnson; Joaquin Sanchez-Sotelo; Jonathan D Barlow; Christopher L Camp

doi:10.1177/23259671231169202

Management of Partial-Thickness Tears of the Distal Bicep Tendon: Evaluation of 111 Patients With 10-Year Follow-up

Orthop J Sports Med. 2023 Jun 16;11(6):23259671231169202. doi: 10.1177/23259671231169202. eCollection 2023 Jun.

Authors

Adam J Tagliero¹, Sara E Till¹, Ryan R Wilbur², Bryant M Song², Anna K Reinholz¹, Adam C Johnson¹, Joaquin Sanchez-Sotelo¹, Jonathan D Barlow¹, Christopher L Camp¹

Affiliations

¹ Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA.
² Washington University Orthopedics, St. Louis, Missouri, USA.

Abstract

Background: There is a paucity of research on the management of partial-thickness tears of the distal bicep tendon, and even less is known about the long-term outcomes of this condition.

Purpose: To identify patients with partial-thickness distal bicep tendon tears and determine (1) patient characteristics and treatment strategies, (2) long-term outcomes, and (3) any identifiable risk factors for progression to surgery or complete tear.

Study design: Case-control study; Level of evidence, 3.

Methods: A fellowship-trained musculoskeletal radiologist identified patients diagnosed with a partial-thickness distal bicep tendon tear on magnetic resonance imaging between 1996 and 2016. Medical records were reviewed to confirm the diagnosis and record study details. Multivariate logistic regression models were created using baseline characteristics, injury details, and physical examination findings to predict operative intervention.

Results: In total, 111 patients met inclusion criteria (54 treated operatively, 57 treated nonoperatively), with 53% of tears in the nondominant arm and a mean follow-up time after surgery of 9.7 ± 6.5 years. Only 5% of patients progressed to full-thickness tears during the study period, at a mean of 35 months after the initial diagnosis. Patients who were nonoperatively treated were less likely to miss time from work (12% vs 61%; P < .001) and missed fewer days (30 vs 97 days; P < .016) than those treated surgically. Multivariate regression analyses demonstrated increased risk of progression to surgery with older age at initial consult (unit odds ratio [OR], 1.1), tenderness to palpation (OR, 7.5), and supination weakness (OR, 24.8). Supination weakness at initial consult was a statistically significant predictor for surgical intervention (OR, 24.8; P = .001).

Conclusion: Clinical outcomes were favorable for patients regardless of treatment strategy. Approximately 50% of patients were treated surgically; patients with supination weakness were 24 times more likely to undergo surgery than those without. Progression to full-thickness tear was a relatively uncommon reason for surgical intervention, with only 5% of patients progressing to full-thickness tears during the study period and the majority occurring within 3 months of initial diagnosis.

Keywords: bicep tears; distal biceps; long-term outcome; partial-thickness distal bicep tendon tear.