Complications of Single-Incision Versus Dual-Incision Distal Biceps Repair A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Comparative Studies.

The purpose of this study was to systematically review and analyze the current evidence in the literature to determine the relative complication rates of the singleincision versus dual-incision approach to distal biceps tendon repair. The literature search was performed based on the PRISMA guidelines. Cohort studies comparing the single-incision or dual-incision approach to biceps tendon repair alone were included. Clinical outcomes were compared, with all statistical analysis performed using Review Manager Version 5.3. A p-value < 0.05 was considered to be statistically significant. Twelve clinical studies with varying levels of evidence (LOE I: 1, LOE II: 1, LOE III: 10) with 2,429 patients were included. Overall, there was a significantly lower rate of total complications with the dual-incision approach (16.1% vs. 23.1%, p < 0.01) and a lower rate of neurological injuries (9.1% vs. 24.1%, p < 0.01). There was a lower rate of lateral antebrachial cutaneous nerve injuries with the dual-incision approach (5.2% vs. 19.5%, p < 0.01), and superficial radial nerve injuries (2.5% vs. 4.8%, p < 0.01), but there was no significant difference in the rate of posterior interosseous nerve injuries (2.2% vs. 1.2%, p = 0.20). There was a significantly lower rate of heterotopic bone formation with the single-incision approach (1.3% vs. 2.7%, p = 0.01). The dual-incision approach decreases the risk of total, overall postoperative complications and sensory nerve injuries following distal biceps repair. However, it has a higher risk of heterotopic bone formation.