Level D· Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studiesNarrative ReviewEurope PMCOpen access

Long head of biceps tendon management in the setting of massive rotator cuff tears

Ardebol J., Ghayyad K., Pak T., Galasso L., Noble M., Kiliç AĪ.

Narrative Review on Tendon Injury, Rotator Cuff, published in JSES Rev Rep Tech (2024) — summary generated from the PubMed abstract.

Open my reading list
Level D· Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studiesEvidence level of this study

Evidence from laboratory and animal studies provides groundwork for understanding mechanisms and potential before human studies continue.

  • Level A · Stronger Clinical Evidence
  • Level B · Emerging clinical evidence with positive signals
  • Level C · Early human research exploring benefits
  • Level D · Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studies
  • Emerging · Emerging topic under active research
Read the A–D evidence level guide

This page is generated from the PubMed record. The Thai description is an automated summary of bibliographic fields and the abstract, not a full translation, and is not medical advice.

Study type
Narrative Review
Journal
JSES Rev Rep Tech (2024)
Reported sample size
—
Source database
Europe PMC
PMID
39474183
PMCID
PMC11514092
DOI
10.1016/j.xrrt.2024.08.003
Citations
3

Abstract (original English)

Pathology of the long head of the biceps tendon is commonly associated with massive rotator cuff tears (MRCTs), which account for roughly one third of all rotator cuff tears. Treatment options for this condition include tenotomy, tenodesis, augmentation, and the use of the tendon as a graft for partial superior capsule reconstruction. Augmentation and superior capsular reconstruction are evolving techniques in the management of MRCTs. However, similar to the lack of consensus on the treatment of MRCTs, there are no clear guidelines for the management of concurrent biceps tendon pathology.

What this study does not prove

  • • This study does not prove SVF is an approved treatment or a replacement for standard care.
  • • This is a narrative review: it collects no new patient data and does not systematically appraise evidence quality.

Evidence level

Evidence from laboratory and animal studies provides groundwork for understanding mechanisms and potential before human studies continue.

How we grade evidence

Browse all related research

Filter the research library by this study's title keywords, author, or publication year.

Related research