Vỡ gân cơ nhị đầu xa Thông tin

This is the clinical evidence summary written for health professionals. It is technical, and it lists the research this page was built from. You do not need to read it to understand your treatment or to make a decision about it.

Overview

• Surgical treatment of chronic distal biceps injuries yields favorable objective and subjective outcomes [1].
• The short-term clinical influence of biceps complications on shoulder outcome is very limited [2].
• The overall frequency of reported complications is higher for single-incision distal biceps repair than for double-incision repair [3].
• Surgical repair of distal biceps tendon ruptures has an overall low rate of serious complications regardless of approach or technique [4].
• Bioabsorbable interference screw fixation of distal biceps ruptures through a single anterior incision is a safe and successful technique for the management of distal biceps tendon ruptures [7].
• Complication rates after distal biceps repair are low [8].
• Patients undergoing distal biceps reconstruction with graft augmentation can expect low complications and good functional results [10].
• Direct repair in the acute setting is preferred over reconstruction with graft augmentation [10].
• Distal biceps repair is associated with a 7.5% major complication rate [12].
• Distal biceps repair is associated with a 4.5% reoperation rate [12].

Anatomy & Pathophysiology

• Thorough knowledge of distal biceps insertional and footprint anatomy is essential for understanding the biomechanics of rupture and reconstruction, and for avoiding nerve injuries [32].
• Distal biceps MRI signal changes consistent with tendinopathy are common in asymptomatic elbows, reducing the probability that symptoms correlate with imaging pathology [29].
• Nonoperative management does not restore function to the elbow in cases of chronic biceps tendon rupture [24].
• Nonoperative treatment of distal biceps rupture may lead to permanent loss of arm function [50].
• Surgical repair of the distal biceps insertion reliably regains both supination and flexion strength in appropriate patients [44].
• Distal biceps repair or reconstruction can restore near-normal flexion and supination strength [42].
• Surgical repair restores supination strength, although outcomes vary [43].
• Operative treatment results in superior elbow and forearm strength and endurance, as well as superior DASH and MEPS scores, compared to nonoperative management [41].
• For patients with higher-demand occupations, surgical repair results in a greater likelihood of rating elbow function as much better compared to nonoperative management [26].
• Most methods of fixation provide adequate strength to allow early active range of motion, with complications being similar between groups using modern surgical techniques [47].
• There is no significant difference in range of motion and strength between different approaches and fixation techniques for distal biceps tendon ruptures [48].
• Fixation constructs using an extramedullary cortical button with or without an interference screw, or two intramedullary cortical buttons, demonstrate biomechanical properties comparable to or superior to the native tendon [45].

Classification

• Partial distal biceps tendon tears encompass a spectrum of disease with variable presentation and morphology [6].
• Isolated short head ruptures are a rare and distinct form of distal biceps tear that present with consistent clinical findings that can aid in diagnosis [11].
• The surgical repair of distal biceps tendon ruptures has an overall low rate of serious complications, regardless of approach or technique [13].
• The evidence-based diagnostic algorithm using the combination of the Flexion Initiation Test (FIT) and hook test demonstrates high accuracy for the diagnosis of both complete and high-grade partial distal biceps tendon tears [16].
• The modified two-incision approach is the current gold standard for distal biceps tendon repairs, though anterior approaches are also effective with similar rerupture rates [20].
• The incidence of women sustaining a distal biceps tendon tear is 3.2%, with partial tears being statistically more common than complete ruptures [22].
• Anterior single incision techniques were used in the majority of cases in a large cohort study of distal biceps tendon repairs, with varying fixation methods [38].

Clinical Presentation

• Chronic distal biceps injuries present with a spectrum of disease where surgical treatment yields favorable objective and subjective outcomes [1].
• Biceps-related complications after tenotomy associated with arthroscopic rotator cuff repair have very limited short-term clinical influence on shoulder outcome [2].
• Isolated distal biceps femoris injuries occurred primarily via noncontact mechanisms [18].
• The prevalence of distal biceps tendon signal changes on MRI in asymptomatic patients is very low [23].

Investigations

• Distal biceps MRI signal changes consistent with tendinopathy are common even in asymptomatic elbows, which reduces the probability that symptoms correlate with pathology on imaging [29].

Treatment

• Surgical management of chronic distal biceps ruptures demonstrates improvement in outcomes including pain reduction and functional ability [9].
• Bioabsorbable interference screw fixation of distal biceps ruptures through a single anterior incision is a safe and successful technique [7].
• The early complication rate following partial distal biceps tendon repair was 20.5% [19].
• Distal biceps repair is associated with a 7.5% major complication rate and 4.5% reoperation rate [12].
• Surgical management of distal biceps tears was a predictor of improved patient-reported outcomes only for patients with complete tears [17].
• The results of the meta-analysis showed the superiority of surgical management over the nonoperative approach for distal biceps tendon detachment, with superior flexion and supination strength and better patient-reported outcomes [34].
• For patients with higher-demand occupations, surgical repair resulted in a greater likelihood of rating elbow function as much better compared to nonoperative management [26].
• Workers' compensation patients who underwent distal biceps tendon repair took longer to return to work and had worse DASH scores than non-workers' compensation patients [40].
• Nonoperative management does not restore function to the elbow [24].

Complications

• Patients should be counseled that 1 in 5 patients will have a minor complication and 1 in 20 patients will have a major complication after surgery on the distal biceps tendon [21].
• Complication rates after distal biceps tendon repair performed by newly trained surgeons were similar to those previously reported in large cohort studies, with nerve injury as the most common complication [25].
• This is the largest analysis of complications after distal biceps repair, indicating a major complication rate of 4.6% [31].

Recovery

• Direct repair in the acute setting is preferred, but patients undergoing distal biceps reconstruction with graft augmentation can expect low complications and good functional results [10].
• The modified two-incision approach is the current gold standard, though anterior approaches are also effective with similar rerupture rates [20].
• One in five patients will have a minor complication and one in twenty patients will have a major complication after surgery on the distal biceps tendon [21].
• Even in the setting of a distal biceps reconstruction with graft augmentation, patients can expect a similar result to primary repair [27].
• The average time to return to work after distal biceps repair in the literature was just beyond 14 weeks [46].
• Timing significantly impacts surgical technique selection in distal biceps ruptures, with direct repair favored for acute injuries and high flexion angle repair or allograft reconstruction for chronic cases [51].

Key Evidence

• [L1] Surgical treatment of chronic distal biceps injuries yields favorable objective and subjective outcomes. [1] (10.1016/j.xrrt.2022.02.007)
• [L3] Nevertheless, the short-term clinical influence of biceps complications on shoulder outcome is very limited. [2] (10.1177/2325967121s00362)
• [L1] The overall frequency of reported complications is higher for single-incision distal biceps repair than for double-incision repair. [3] (10.1177/2325967116668137)
• [L3] Surgical repair of distal biceps tendon ruptures has an overall low rate of serious complications regardless of approach or technique. [4] (10.1016/j.jse.2017.06.021)
• [L5] Partial distal biceps tendon tears encompass a spectrum of disease with variable presentation and morphology. [6] (10.1177/17585732241245054)
• [Paper] This is a safe and successful technique for the management of distal biceps tendon ruptures. [7] (10.1007/s00402-009-0974-x)
• [L3] Complication rates after distal biceps repair are low. [8] (10.5397/cise.2021.00472)
• [L4] Surgical management of chronic distal biceps ruptures demonstrates improvement in outcomes including pain reduction and functional ability. [9] (10.1177/23259671211065772)
• [L3] Patients can be consulted that direct repair in the acute setting is preferred; however, even in the setting of a distal biceps reconstruction with graft augmentation, they can expect low complications and good functional results. [10] (10.1016/j.jseint.2020.10.023)
• [L4] Isolated short head ruptures are a rare and distinct form of distal biceps tear that present with consistent clinical findings that can aid in diagnosis. [11] (10.1016/j.jse.2020.04.038)
• [L3] Distal biceps repair is associated with a 7.5% major complication rate and 4.5% reoperation rate. [12] (10.1016/j.jse.2018.06.028)
• [L3] The surgical repair of distal biceps tendon ruptures has an overall low rate of serious complications, regardless of approach or technique. [13] (10.1177/0363546517720200)
• [L4] The evidence-based diagnostic algorithm using the combination of the FIT and hook test demonstrates high accuracy for the diagnosis of both complete and high-grade partial distal biceps tendon tears. [16] (10.1016/j.asmr.2021.01.010)
• [L2] Surgical management of distal biceps tears was a predictor of improved patient-reported outcomes only for patients with complete tears. [17] (10.1016/j.jhsa.2025.12.027)
• [L4] Isolated distal biceps femoris injuries occurred primarily via noncontact mechanisms. [18] (10.1177/2325967118781828)
• [L4] The early complication rate following partial distal biceps tendon repair was 20.5%. [19] (10.1016/j.jhsa.2025.04.012)
• [L5] This narrative review summarizes the history, anatomy, and controversies surrounding distal biceps tendon ruptures and repairs, highlighting that the modified two-incision approach is the current gold standard, though anterior approaches are also effective with similar rerupture rates. [20] (10.1016/j.jse.2016.05.025)
• [L4] Patients should be counseled that 1 in 5 patients will have a minor complication and 1 in 20 patients will have a major complication after surgery on the distal biceps tendon. [21] (10.1016/j.jse.2016.02.032)
• [L4] The incidence of women sustaining a distal biceps tendon tear is 3.2%, with partial tears being statistically more common than complete ruptures. [22] (10.1016/j.jse.2014.02.006)
• [L3] The prevalence of distal biceps tendon signal changes on MRI in asymptomatic patients is very low. [23] (10.1016/j.jhsa.2022.01.020)
• [L5] Nonoperative management does not restore function to the elbow. [24] (10.1007/s11552-013-9551-4)
• [L4] Complication rates after distal biceps tendon repair performed by newly trained surgeons were similar to those previously reported in large cohort studies, with nerve injury as the most common complication. [25] (10.1016/j.jse.2022.09.014)
• [L4] For patients with higher-demand occupations, surgical repair resulted in greater likelihood of rating elbow function as much better compared to nonoperative management. [26] (10.1016/j.jse.2017.12.010)
• [L3] Patients can be consulted that even in the setting of a distal biceps reconstruction with graft augmentation, they can expect a similar result to primary repair. [27] (10.1016/j.jse.2020.01.062)
• [L4] The finding that distal biceps MRI signal changes consistent with tendinopathy are common even in asymptomatic elbows reduces the probability that symptoms correlate with pathology on imaging. [29] (10.5397/cise.2023.00164)
• [L2] This is the largest analysis of complications after distal biceps repair, indicating a major complication rate of 4.6%. [31] (10.1177/0363546519899933)
• [L4] Thorough knowledge of the anatomy is essential for the surgeon in order to understand the biomechanics of rupture and reconstruction of the distal biceps tendon and to avoid injuries of the nerves. [32] (10.1007/s00167-014-3322-9)
• [L1] The results of this meta-analysis showed the superiority of surgical management over the nonoperative approach for distal biceps tendon detachment, with superior flexion and supination strength and better patient-reported outcomes. [34] (10.1177/23259671211037311)
• [L3] The study examined clinical and surgical outcomes for distal biceps tendon repairs in a large cohort, finding that anterior single incision techniques were used in the majority of cases with varying fixation methods. [38] (10.1016/j.jse.2016.12.053)
• [L3] WC patients who underwent distal biceps tendon repair took longer to return to work and had worse DASH scores than non-WC patients. [40] (10.1016/j.jse.2012.11.011)
• [L1] Operative treatment resulted in superior elbow and forearm strength and endurance, as well as superior DASH and MEPS scores compared to nonoperative management. [41] (10.1016/j.jse.2021.12.001)
• [L5] Distal biceps repair/reconstruction can restore near-normal flexion and supination strength. [42] (10.1016/j.jhsa.2019.09.014)
• [L5] Surgical repair restores supination strength, though outcomes vary. [43] (10.1016/j.jhsa.2012.02.008)
• [L4] Surgical repair of the distal biceps insertion reliably regains both supination and flexion strength in appropriate patients. [44] (10.5435/00124635-201003000-00003)
• [L1] The fixation constructs that consistently demonstrated comparable or better biomechanical properties to native tendon were the extramedullary cortical button with or without interference screw and two intramedullary cortical buttons. [45] (10.1016/j.arthro.2022.08.037)
• [L4] The average time to return to work after distal biceps repair in the literature was just beyond 14 weeks. [46] (10.1016/j.jse.2019.12.006)
• [L4] Most methods of fixation provide adequate strength to allow early active range of motion, and complications are similar between groups using modern surgical techniques. [47] (10.1016/j.jse.2010.11.009)
• [L2] There was no significant difference in range of motion and strength between the different approaches and fixation techniques. [48] (10.1016/j.jse.2015.09.004)
• [L4] Nonoperative treatment may lead to a degree of permanent loss of function of the arm. [50] (10.1177/03635465990270020201)
• [L3] Timing significantly impacts surgical technique selection in distal biceps tendon ruptures, with direct repair favored for acute injuries and high flexion angle repair or allograft reconstruction for chronic cases. [51] (10.1016/j.jse.2025.07.027)

References

[1] Outcomes and complications after different surgical techniques for the treatment of chronic distal biceps tendon ruptures: a systematic review and quantitative synthesis. JSES Reviews, Reports, and Techniques. 2022. DOI: 10.1016/j.xrrt.2022.02.007

[2] Biceps-related complications after tenotomy associated with arthroscopic rotator cuff repair: risk factors and clinical impact. Orthopaedic Journal of Sports Medicine. 2022. DOI: 10.1177/2325967121s00362

[3] Complications of Distal Biceps Tendon Repair. Orthopaedic Journal of Sports Medicine. 2016. DOI: 10.1177/2325967116668137

[4] Analysis of 784 surgically treated distal biceps tendon ruptures. Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery. 2017. DOI: 10.1016/j.jse.2017.06.021

[6] Current concepts in the aetiology, assessment and management of partial distal biceps tendon tears. Shoulder & Elbow. 2024. DOI: 10.1177/17585732241245054

[7] Bioabsorbable interference screw fixation of distal biceps ruptures through a single anterior incision: a single-surgeon case series and review of the literature. Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery. 2009. DOI: 10.1007/s00402-009-0974-x

[8] Determining the incidence and risk factors for short-term complications following distal biceps tendon repair. Clinics in Shoulder and Elbow. 2022. DOI: 10.5397/cise.2021.00472

[9] Surgical Results of Chronic Distal Biceps Ruptures: A Systematic Review. Orthopaedic Journal of Sports Medicine. 2022. DOI: 10.1177/23259671211065772

[10] Outcomes of chronic distal biceps reconstruction with tendon grafting: a matched comparison with primary repair. JSES International. 2021. DOI: 10.1016/j.jseint.2020.10.023

[11] Distal biceps short head tears: repair, reconstruction, and systematic review. Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery. 2020. DOI: 10.1016/j.jse.2020.04.038

[12] Major complications after distal biceps tendon repairs: retrospective cohort analysis of 970 cases. Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery. 2018. DOI: 10.1016/j.jse.2018.06.028

[13] Surgical Treatment of Distal Biceps Tendon Ruptures: An Analysis of Complications in 784 Surgical Repairs. The American Journal of Sports Medicine. 2017. DOI: 10.1177/0363546517720200

[16] The Flexion Initiation Test and an Evidence‐Based Diagnostic Algorithm for Distal Biceps Tendon Tears. Arthroscopy, Sports Medicine, and Rehabilitation. 2021. DOI: 10.1016/j.asmr.2021.01.010

[17] Thirty-Six Percent Conversion to Surgery Rate for Nonsurgical Treatment of Complete and Partial Distal Biceps Tears. The Journal of Hand Surgery. 2026. DOI: 10.1016/j.jhsa.2025.12.027

[18] Isolated Tearing and Avulsion of the Distal Biceps Femoris Tendon During Sporting Activities: A Systematic Review. Orthopaedic Journal of Sports Medicine. 2018. DOI: 10.1177/2325967118781828

[19] Early Postoperative Complications Following Partial Distal Biceps Tendon Surgical Repair. The Journal of Hand Surgery. 2026. DOI: 10.1016/j.jhsa.2025.04.012

[20] Distal biceps tendon history, updates, and controversies: from the closed American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons meeting—2015. Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery. 2016. DOI: 10.1016/j.jse.2016.05.025

[21] Factors associated with adverse events after distal biceps tendon repair or reconstruction. Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery. 2016. DOI: 10.1016/j.jse.2016.02.032

[22] Re-rupture rate of primarily repaired distal biceps tendon injuries. Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery. 2014. DOI: 10.1016/j.jse.2014.02.006

[23] Evaluation of MRI Signal Changes of the Distal Biceps Tendon in Asymptomatic Patients. The Journal of Hand Surgery. 2022. DOI: 10.1016/j.jhsa.2022.01.020

[24] Treatment of Chronic Biceps Tendon Ruptures. HAND. 2013. DOI: 10.1007/s11552-013-9551-4

[25] Trends and complications of distal biceps tendon repair among American Board of Orthopaedic Surgery part II oral examination candidates. Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery. 2023. DOI: 10.1016/j.jse.2022.09.014

[26] Is nonoperative management of partial distal biceps tears really successful?. Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery. 2018. DOI: 10.1016/j.jse.2017.12.010

[27] Chronic Distal Biceps Repair with Tendon Grafting: A Matched Comparison to Primary Repair. Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery. 2020. DOI: 10.1016/j.jse.2020.01.062

[29] Prevalence of incidental distal biceps signal changes on magnetic resonance imaging. Clinics in Shoulder and Elbow. 2023. DOI: 10.5397/cise.2023.00164

[31] Complications After Distal Biceps Tendon Repair: A Systematic Review. The American Journal of Sports Medicine. 2020. DOI: 10.1177/0363546519899933

[32] Clinical relevance of distal biceps insertional and footprint anatomy. Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy. 2014. DOI: 10.1007/s00167-014-3322-9

[34] Operative Versus Nonoperative Management for Distal Biceps Brachii Tendon Lesions: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Orthopaedic Journal of Sports Medicine. 2021. DOI: 10.1177/23259671211037311

[38] The distal biceps deficient arm, “the short arc syndrome”. Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery. 2017. DOI: 10.1016/j.jse.2016.12.053

[40] Outcomes after distal biceps repair in patients with workers' compensation claims. Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery. 2013. DOI: 10.1016/j.jse.2012.11.011

[41] Operative vs. nonoperative treatment of distal biceps ruptures: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery. 2022. DOI: 10.1016/j.jse.2021.12.001

[42] Distal Biceps Tendon Repair and Reconstruction. The Journal of Hand Surgery. 2020. DOI: 10.1016/j.jhsa.2019.09.014

[43] Repair of Distal Biceps Ruptures. The Journal of Hand Surgery. 2012. DOI: 10.1016/j.jhsa.2012.02.008

[44] Surgical Treatment of Distal Biceps Rupture. American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeon. 2010. DOI: 10.5435/00124635-201003000-00003

[45] Two Intramedullary and 1 Extramedullary Cortical Button, With or Without Interference Screw, Show Biomechanical Properties Superior to Native Tendon in Repair of the Distal Biceps Tendon: A Systematic Review and Network Meta‐analysis of Biomechanical Performance. Arthroscopy. 2022. DOI: 10.1016/j.arthro.2022.08.037

[46] Return to work following a distal biceps repair: a systematic review of the literature. Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery. 2020. DOI: 10.1016/j.jse.2019.12.006

[47] Controversies in the surgical treatment of distal biceps tendon ruptures: single versus double-incision repairs. Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery. 2011. DOI: 10.1016/j.jse.2010.11.009

[48] Refixation techniques and approaches for distal biceps tendon ruptures: a systematic review of clinical studies. Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery. 2016. DOI: 10.1016/j.jse.2015.09.004

[50] Rupture of the Distal Biceps Tendon. The American Journal of Sports Medicine. 1999. DOI: 10.1177/03635465990270020201

[51] Effect of time from injury to surgery on surgical technique and complication rate in distal biceps tendon repair. Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery. 2026. DOI: 10.1016/j.jse.2025.07.027