***TASK*** the task is to summarize an input biomedical literature in six sentences 
    ***INPUT*** the input is a biomedical literature 
    ***OUTPUT*** the output is the summary of an input biomedical literature in six sentences 
    ***DOCUMENTATION*** 
    ***EXAMPLES*** 
    Input: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the outcomes of patients undergoing subpectoral biceps tenodesis for bicipital tendonitis with a superior labral anterior-posterior ( SLAP ) tear . Patients undergoing primary subpectoral biceps tenodesis for arthroscopically confirmed SLAP tears with signs or findings of bicipital tendonitis were included . An independent observer collected data prospect ively as part of a data repository , which was then analyzed retrospectively . Primary outcome measures were the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons ( ASES ) score and pain relief via visual analog scale ( VAS ) . Secondary outcome measures included the Simple Shoulder Test ( SST ) , Constant , Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation ( SANE ) , and Short Form 12 ( SF-12 ) scores . Twenty-eight patients with a mean±SD age of 43.7±13.4 years and a mean±SD follow-up of 2.0±1.0 years met inclusion criteria . Workers ' compensation was involved with 43 % of cases , and 46 % of the included patients were manual laborers . Eight ( 32 % ) patients were athletes , and 88 % of the athletes were overhead athletes . Intraoperatively , 15 ( 54 % ) patients had type I SLAP tears , 10 ( 36 % ) had type II SLAP tears , 1 ( 3 % ) had a type III SLAP tear , and 2 ( 7 % ) had type IV SLAP tears . Significant improvements were seen in the following outcome measures pre- vs postoperatively : ASES score ( 58±23 vs 89±18 ; P=.001 ) , SST score ( 6.3±3.6 vs 10.6±3.3 ; P=.001 ) , SANE score ( 54±24 vs 88±25 ; P=.003 ) , VAS score ( 3.8±2.0 vs 1.1±1.8 ; P=.001 ) , SF-12 overall score ( 35±6 vs 42±6 ; P=.001 ) , and SF-12 physical component score ( 39±6 vs 50±10 ; P=.001 ) . Overall satisfaction was excellent in 80 % of patients . Subpectoral biceps tenodesis demonstrates excellent clinical outcomes in select patients with SLAP tears . [ Orthopedics . 2015 ; 38(1):e48-e53 . ] Background Labral repair and biceps tenodesis are routine operations for superior labrum anterior posterior ( SLAP ) lesion of the shoulder , but evidence of their efficacy is lacking . We evaluated the effect of labral repair , biceps tenodesis and sham surgery on SLAP lesions . Methods A double-blind , sham-controlled trial was conducted with 118 surgical c and i date s ( mean age 40 years ) , with patient history , clinical symptoms and MRI arthrography indicating an isolated type II SLAP lesion . Patients were r and omly assigned to either labral repair ( n=40 ) , biceps tenodesis ( n=39 ) or sham surgery ( n=39 ) if arthroscopy revealed an isolated SLAP II lesion . Primary outcomes at 6 and 24 months were clinical Rowe score ranging from 0 to 100 ( best possible ) and Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index ( WOSI ) ranging from 0 ( best possible ) to 2100 . Secondary outcomes were Oxford Instability Shoulder Score , change in main symptoms , EuroQol ( EQ-5D and EQ-VAS ) , patient satisfaction and complications . Results There were no significant between-group differences at any follow-up in any outcome . Between-group differences in Rowe scores at 2 years were : biceps tenodesis versus labral repair : 1.0 ( 95 % CI −5.4 to 7.4 ) , p=0.76 ; biceps tenodesis versus sham surgery : 1.6 ( 95 % CI −5.0 to 8.1 ) , p=0.64 ; and labral repair versus sham surgery : 0.6 ( 95 % CI −5.9 to 7.0 ) , p=0.86 . Similar results —no differences between groups — were found for WOSI scores . Postoperative stiffness occurred in five patients after labral repair and in four patients after tenodesis . Conclusion Neither labral repair nor biceps tenodesis had any significant clinical benefit over sham surgery for patients with SLAP II lesions in the population studied . Trial registration number Clinical Trials.gov identifier : This study compared arthroscopic biceps tenodesis with biceps repair for isolated type II superior labrum anterior and posterior ( SLAP ) lesions in patients older than 35 years . The authors identified isolated type II SLAP lesions that were surgically managed over a 5-year period . Minimum 2-year follow-up data were available for 22 patients who underwent biceps repair ( repair group ) and for 15 patients who underwent a primary biceps tenodesis ( tenodesis group ) . Mean age at surgery was 45.2±5.5 years in the repair group and 52.0±8.0 years in the tenodesis group . In the repair group , functional outcome improved from baseline to final follow-up using the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons ( ASES ) ( 47.5 to 87.4 , respectively ; P<.0001 ) and University of California , Los Angeles ( UCLA ) scores ( 18.5 to 31.2 , respectively ; P<.0001 ) . In the tenodesis group , similar findings were observed for the ASES ( 43.4 to 89.9 , respectively ; P<.0001 ) and UCLA scores ( 19.0 to 32.7 , respectively ; P<.0001 ) . No difference was found in functional outcome between the groups . Full range of motion recovery was delayed by approximately 3 months in the repair group compared with the tenodesis group ( P=.0631 ) . Two patients in the repair group required a secondary capsular release . Seventy-seven percent of patients in the repair group and 100 % of patients in the tenodesis group were satisfied and returned to normal activity ( P=.0673 ) . In the current study , individuals older than 35 years with an isolated type II SLAP lesion had a shorter postoperative recovery , a more predictable functional outcome , and a higher rate of satisfaction and return to activity with a biceps tenodesis compared with a biceps repair . Based on these observations , biceps tenodesis is preferable to biceps repair for isolated type II SLAP lesions in nonoverhead athletes older than 35 years Background : There are no studies examining superior labrum anterior and posterior ( SLAP ) repair combined with repair of large to massive rotator cuff tears , and it is unclear whether a combined SLAP repair would lead to better outcomes than biceps tenotomy . Hypothesis : Tenotomy and rotator cuff repair would lead to better outcomes compared with those of combined SLAP and rotator cuff repair . Study Design : Cohort study ; Level of evidence , 2 . Methods : Our study population consisted of 36 patients who had undergone either combined SLAP and rotator cuff repair ( when the biceps was too healthy to cut ; group R = 16 patients ) or tenotomy and rotator cuff repair ( when any fraying or partial tear existed in the biceps tendon ; group T = 20 patients ) for concomitant type II SLAP lesions and large to massive rotator cuff tears . The cuff repair was performed in a single row for both groups . Outcomes were assessed by comparing range of motion as well as Simple Shoulder Test ( SST ) , American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons ( ASES ) , and University of California , Los Angeles ( UCLA ) scores between the 2 groups . Results : At the 2-year follow-up , both groups demonstrated significant improvements in functional shoulder scores and range of motion . However , group T had better SST scores ( group T , 9.3 ± 1.6 ; group R , 7.8 ± 1.9 ; P = .012 ) , ASES scores ( group T , 88.6 ± 8.9 ; group R , 80.4 ±8.9 ; P = .009 ) , UCLA scores ( group T , 29.6 ± 3.0 ; group R , 26.0 ± 4.2 ; P = .007 ) , and forward flexion ( group T , 145.9 ° ± 13.0 ° ; group R , 132.5 ° ± 15.3 ° ; P = .008 ) . The mean tear size and the degree of preoperative muscle atrophy and fatty infiltration on magnetic resonance imaging were similar between the groups . Conclusion : For patients with concomitant type II SLAP lesions and large to massive rotator cuff tears , the outcomes of simultaneous arthroscopic SLAP and rotator cuff repair were inferior to those of arthroscopic biceps tenotomy and cuff repair in terms of functional shoulder scores and range of motion . Biceps tenotomy and rotator cuff repair may be a more reliable method to address concomitant type II SLAP lesions and large to massive rotator cuff tears in patients , although a r and omized controlled trial is needed to confirm the results Background Arthroscopic management has been recommended for some superior labrum anterior and posterior ( SLAP ) lesions , but no studies have focused on patients over 50 years of age with rotator cuff tear and a type II SLAP lesion . Hypothesis In patients over 50 years of age with an arthroscopically confirmed lesion of the rotator cuff and a type II SLAP lesion , there is no difference between ( 1 ) repair of both lesions and ( 2 ) repair of the rotator cuff tear without repair of the SLAP II lesion but with a tenotomy of the long head of the biceps . Study Design R and omized controlled clinical trial ; Level of evidence , 1 . Methods We recruited 63 patients . In 31 patients , we repaired the rotator cuff and the type II SLAP lesion ( group 1 ) . In the other 32 patients , we repaired the rotator cuff and tenotomized the long head of the biceps ( group 2 ) . Seven patients ( 2 in group 1 and 5 in group 2 ) were lost to final follow-up . Results At a minimum 2.9 years ’ follow-up , statistically significant differences were seen with respect to the University of California , Los Angeles ( UCLA ) score and range of motion values . In group 1 ( SLAP repair and rotator cuff repair ) , the UCLA showed a statistically significant improvement from a preoperative average rating of 10.4 ( range , 6–14 ) to an average of 27.9 ( range , 24–35 ) postoperatively ( P < .001 ) . In group 2 ( biceps tenotomy and rotator cuff repair ) , the UCLA showed a statistically significant improvement from a preoperative average rating of 10.1 ( range , 5–14 ) to an average of 32.1 ( range , 30–35 ) postoperatively ( P < .001 ) There was a statistically significant difference in total postoperative UCLA scores and range of motion when comparing the 2 groups postoperatively ( P < .05 ) . Conclusions There are no advantages in repairing a type II SLAP lesion when associated with a rotator cuff tear in patients over 50 years of age . The association of rotator cuff repair and biceps tenotomy provides better clinical outcome compared with repair of the type II SLAP lesion and the rotator cuff PURPOSE The aims of this prospect i ve cohort study were to assess the long-term results after  isolated superior labral repair  and to determine whether the results were associated with age . METHODS One hundred seven patients underwent repair of isolated SLAP tears . There were 36 women and 71 men with a mean age of 43.8 years ( range , 20 to 68 years ) . Mean follow-up was 5.3 years ( range , 4 to 8 years ) . Of the patients , 62 ( 57.9 % ) were aged 40 years or older . Follow-up examinations were performed by an independent examiner ; 102 patients ( 95.3 % ) had a 5-year follow-up . RESULTS The Rowe score improved from 62.8 ( SD , 11.4 ) preoperatively to 92.1 ( SD , 13.5 ) at follow-up ( P < .001 ) . Satisfaction was rated excellent/good for 90 patients ( 88 % ) at 5 years . There was no significant difference in the results for patients aged 40 years or older and those aged under 40 years . Difficulty with postoperative stiffness and pain was reported by 14 patients ( 13.1 % ) . CONCLUSIONS Our results suggest that long-term outcomes after isolated labral repair for SLAP lesions are good and independent of age . Postoperative stiffness was registered in 13.1 % of the patients . LEVEL OF EVIDENCE Level IV , therapeutic case series The aim of this study was to determine whether or not detaching the biceps tendon from the glenoid after tenodesis performed with the inclusion of the biceps in the rotator cuff suture results in an improved outcome . From 1999 to 2001 , 22 patients had an arthroscopic rotator cuff repair and associated biceps tendon lesions that were repaired with two new arthroscopic techniques of tenodesis incorporating the biceps tendon in the rotator cuff suture . Patients were r and omised into one of two groups : tenodesis without tenotomy ( group 1 ) and tenodesis with tenotomy ( group 2 ) . Preoperative and postoperative functions were assessed by means of a modified UCLA rating scale and shoulder ROM . The mean follow-up period was 47.2 months ( range 36– 59 ) . In group 1 ( tenodesis without tenotomy ) , eight patients had an excellent postoperative score and three a good 
    Output:
    
The pooled results of UCLA score , SST score , and complications showed that the differences were not statistically significant between the two interventions .
The difference of ASES score and satisfaction rate was statistically significant between arthroscopic repair and biceps tenotomy and tenodesis intervention , and arthroscopic biceps tenotomy and tenodesis treatment was more effective .
Conclusions Both arthroscopic repair and biceps tenotomy and tenodesis interventions had benefits in type II SLAP lesions .
Arthroscopic biceps tenotomy and tenodesis treatment provides better clinical outcome in ASES score and satisfaction rate and comparable complications compared with arthroscopic repair treatment .