Alexander kreines - Rowan University School of Osteopathic Medicine, Stratford, NJ, USA
Manuel Pontes - Rowan University School of Osteopathic Medicine, Stratford, NJ, USA
Elizabeth Ford - Rowan University School of Osteopathic Medicine, Stratford, NJ, USA
Kristen Herbst - Rowan University School of Osteopathic Medicine, Stratford, NJ, USA

Background: To retrospectively review surgical outcomes of prospectively collected data on a series of patients whounderwent revision of a type II SLAP repair to arthroscopic biceps tenodesis due to an unsuccessful outcome.Methods: A retrospective review was performed on a cohort of patients who underwent arthroscopic biceps tenodesisfor a failed type II SLAP repair from 2010 to 2014. Range of motion (ROM) in four planes was measured pre-andpostoperatively. In addition, all patients completed the American Shoulder Elbow Surgeons (ASES) standardizedshoulder assessment form, the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) for pain, and the Short Form-12 (SF-12) scores.Results: Overall, 26 patients met inclusion criteria. All 26 patients were available for follow-up at a minimum of twoyears (100% follow-up). The mean age of the patients was 37(range 26-54), 85% were male, and 58% were overheadlaborers. Clinical as well as statistical improvement was noted following tenodesis across all outcome measurements(P<0.01). Additionally, ROM improved in all four planes (P<0.01). The rate of return to work was 85% with workers’compensation status leading to inferior outcomes. Two complications were noted which required an additional surgery.Conclusion: Arthroscopic biceps tenodesis demonstrates to be an effective treatment for a failed type II SLAP repairwith improved patient satisfaction, pain relief, and range of motion at two-years follow-up with a low complication rate.Level of evidence: III

Biceps, Biceps tenodesis, Revision SLAP repair, shoulder, Type II SLAP tear