• Baseball
• Internal impingement
• Overhead athlete
• Physical examination
• Rotator cuff
• SLAP tear
• Scapular dyskinesia
• Throwing shoulder

• Humans
• Physical Examination/methods
• Shoulder Injuries/diagnosis
• Shoulder Joint/physiopathology
• Shoulder Joint/anatomy & histology
• Athletic Injuries/diagnosis
• Joint Instability/diagnosis
• Joint Instability/physiopathology
• Shoulder/anatomy & histology
• Shoulder/physiopathology
• Biomechanical Phenomena

• arthroscopy
• labrum
• physical examination
• shoulder
• superior labrum anterior to posterior lesion

• Humans
• Shoulder Injuries
• Sensitivity and Specificity
• Physical Examination/methods
• Shoulder
• Shoulder Joint
• Arthroscopy

Superior labrum anterior-posterior (SLAP) lesions are common in overhead athletes. Though some patients have asymptomatic lesions, many tears cause pain and diminished athletic performance. Accurate diagnosis of SLAP lesions can be challenging as the sensitivity and specificity of both the physical exam and advanced imaging is questionable. Management is also difficult, as treatment can be life-altering or career-ending for many athletes. If first-line nonoperative treatment fails, surgical options may be considered. The optimal surgical management of SLAP lesions in athletes is debated. Historically, return to play (RTP) rates among athletes who have undergone arthroscopic SLAP repair have been unsatisfactory, prompting clinicians to seek alternate surgical options. Biceps tenodesis (BT) has been postulated to eliminate biceps tendon-related pain in the shoulder and is increasingly used as a primary procedure for SLAP lesions. The purpose of this text is to review the current literature on the surgical management of SLAP lesions in athletes with an emphasis on the role of BT.

• SLAP lesion
• SLAP tear
• biceps-labral complex
• overhead athlete
• superior labrum anterior-posterior
• throwing athlete

• Bankart lesion
• Recurrent anterior glenohumeral instability
• diagnosis of SLAP lesion
• diagnostic accuracy
• predictive value
• provocative tests for SLAP lesion
• type II SLAP lesion
• type V SLAP lesion

• Active Compression Test
• diagnostic accuracy
• posttest probability
• shoulder
• special test
• superior labrum anterior to posterior

• SLAP
• aetiology
• controversies
• examination
• repair
• tenodesis
• treatment

SLAP lesions of the shoulder are challenging to diagnose by clinical means alone. Interpretation of MR images requires knowledge of the normal appearance of the labrum, its anatomical variants, and the characteristic patterns of SLAP lesions. In general, high signal extending anterior and posterior to the biceps anchor is the hallmark of SLAP lesions. Common diagnostic criteria for a SLAP lesion by MR or MR arthrography include the following: presence of a laterally curved, high signal intensity in the labrum on a coronal image, multiple or branching lines of high signal intensity in the superior labrum on a coronal image, full-thickness detachment with irregularly marginated high signal intensity and/or separation >2 mm on conventional MRI or 3 mm on MR arthrography between the labrum and glenoid on a coronal image, and a paralabral cyst extending from the superior labrum.

MR diagnosis of SLAP tears may be improved with provocative maneuvers, such as longitudinal traction of the arm or positioning of the shoulder in abduction and external rotation during imaging. The use of intra-articular contrast distends the joint similar to what occurs during arthroscopy and forced diffusion under the labrum may improve the ability to detect SLAP lesions that might not be seen with standard MR. Improved diagnostic accuracy for SLAP tears is seen with 3-T compared with 1.5-T MR imaging, with or without intra-articular contrast material.

Regardless of MR findings, however, physicians should be cautious when recommending surgery in the patient with a vague clinical picture. The patient’s history, physical exam, and imaging evaluation all should be considered together in making the decision to proceed with surgery.

• Biceps anchor
• Intra-articular
• MR arthrography
• MRI
• SLAP tear
• Superior labrum

Purpose  Shoulder pain and disability pose a diagnostic challenge owing to the numerous etiologies and the potential for multiple disorders to exist simultaneously. The evidence to support the use of clinical tests for superior labral anterior to posterior complex (SLAP) is weak or absent. The purpose of this study is to determine the diagnostic validity of physical examination maneuvers for SLAP lesions by performing a methodologically rigorous, clinically applicable study.

Methods  We recruited consecutive new shoulder patients reporting pain and/or disability. The physician took a history and indicated their certainty about each possible diagnosis (“certain the diagnosis is absent/present,” or “uncertain requires further testing”). The clinician performed the physical tests for diagnoses where uncertainty remained. Magnetic resonance imaging arthrogram and arthroscopic examination were the gold standards. We calculated sensitivity, specificity, and likelihood ratios (LRs) and investigated whether combinations of the top tests provided stronger predictions.

Results  Ninety-three patients underwent physical examination for SLAP lesions. When using the presence of a SLAP lesion (Types I–V) as disease positive, none of the tests was sensitive (10.3–33.3) although they were moderately specific (61.3–92.6). When disease positive was defined as repaired SLAP lesion (including biceps tenodesis or tenotomy), the sensitivity (10.5–38.7) and specificity (70.6–93.8) of tests improved although not by a substantial amount. None of the tests was found to be clinically useful for predicting repairable SLAP lesions with all LRs close to one. The compression rotation test had the best LR for both definitions of disease (SLAP tear present = 1.8 and SLAP repaired = 1.67). There was no optimal combination of tests for diagnosing repairable SLAP lesions, with at least two tests positive providing the best combination of measurement properties (sensitivity 46.1% and specificity 64.7%).

Conclusion  Our study demonstrates that the physical examination tests for SLAP lesions are poor diagnostic indicators of disease. Performing a combination of tests will likely help, although the magnitude of the improvement is minimal. These authors caution clinicians placing confidence in the physical examination tests for SLAP lesions rather we suggest that clinicians rely on diagnostic imaging to confirm this diagnosis.

• SLAP
• diagnosis
• physical examination
• shoulder

• Glenoid
• Humerus
• Rotator cuff tear
• Superior labrum anterior to posterior lesion

• Arthroscopy
• Classification
• MRI
• SLAP
• Shoulder

• Clinical test
• Diagnosis
• Meta-analysis
• Physical examination
• Rotator cuff tear
• SLAP (superior labral anterior posterior) lesion
• Shoulder
• Shoulder pain
• Subacromial impingement
• Systematic review

Surgical treatment of superior labral anterior posterior (SLAP) lesion becomes more and more frequent which is the consequence of evolving progress in both, imaging and surgical technique as well as implants. The first classification of SLAP lesions was described in 1990, a subdivision in four types existed. The rising comprehension of pathology and pathophysiology in SLAP lesions contributed to increase the types in SLAP classification to ten. Concerning the causative mechanism of SLAP lesions, acute trauma has to be differed from chronic degeneration. Overhead athletes tend to develop a glenohumeral internal rotation deficit which forms the basis for two controversial discussed potential mechanisms of pathophysiology in SLAP lesions: Internal impingement and peel-back mechanism. Clinical examination often remains unspecific whereas soft tissue imaging such as direct or indirect magnetic resonance arthrography has technically improved and is regarded to be indispensable in detection of SLAP lesions. Concomitant pathologies as Bankart lesions, rotator cuff tears or perilabral cysts should be taken into consideration when planning a personalized therapeutic strategy. In addition, normal variants such as sublabral recess, sublabral hole, Buford complex and other less common variants have to be distinguished. The most frequent SLAP type II needs a sophisticated approach when surgical teatment comes into consideration. While SLAP repair is considered to be the standard operative option, overhead athletes benefit from a biceps tenodesis because improved patient-reported satisfaction and higher rate of return to pre-injury level of sports has been reported.

• Superior labral anterior posterior lesion
• Tenodesis
• Superior labral anterior posterior repair
• Shoulder arthroscopy
• Biceps tendon

• abduction
• external rotation
• labral tear
• shoulder

• Physical examination
• shoulder

• Clinical assessment
• labral tear
• labrum; test

• Arthroscopy
• Bursa, Synovial/injuries
• Bursitis/diagnosis
• Glenoid Cavity
• Humans
• Joint Instability/diagnosis
• Physical Examination/methods
• Prospective Studies
• Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
• Rotator Cuff Injuries
• Rupture/diagnosis
• Shoulder Impingement Syndrome/diagnosis
• Tendinopathy/diagnosis

• Department of Health

• baseball
• glenohumeral joint
• scapula

• slap; superior labrum anterior posterior lesion
• provocative test
• long head biceps brachii
• diagnoses
• electromyography

• Bayes Theorem
• Diagnostic Accuracy
• Likelihood Ratio
• QUADAS
• Sensitivity
• Specificity

This study was designed to quantify tensile forces within the intra-articular long head of the bicep tendon (LHBT) under conditions of passive limb positioning and physiologic load, which simulate contraction of the LHBT.

A force probe was inserted into the intra-articular LHBT, just distal to its supra-glenoid origin, in six fresh-frozen cadaveric specimens. Initially, specimens were manually manipulated through 30 glenohumeral joint positions, combining humeral rotation and elbow/forearm position. In the second phase, a 55 N tensile load was applied through the LHBT in 18 limb positions. Intra-tendinous tension was recorded in all positions under both conditions.

External humeral rotation significantly increased tension with glenohumeral forward flexion (P<0.0001). Conversely, internal humeral rotation significantly increased tension with glenohumeral abduction and extension (P<0.0001). A position of glenohumeral extension and internal rotation, with the elbow extended and forearm pronated, produced the highest tension in the intra-articular LHBT (P<0.0001). Under applied load conditions, observed LHTB tension was not statistically different in any glenohumeral position (P=0.1468, power = 88%). The greater tuberosity was noted to impinge on the force probe in forward flexion and internal rotation in two specimens.

Variable tensile forces are seen in the intra-articular LHBT as a function of both limb position and simulated biceps contraction. Our findings provide a thorough data set that may be used to help substantiate or refute current or future hypotheses regarding LHBT function, pathology, and clinical tests.

Identifying positions of glenohumeral motion, which affect LHBT tension will provide an anatomic basis for clinical tests proposed to be for diagnosing LHBT lesions, including superior labral anterior and posterior tears.

• Cadvaric study
• SLAP lesion
• glenohumeral joint
• limb position
• long head biceps tendon