Skip to main content
OrthoVellumOrthopaedic Exam Prep
Pricing
About OrthoVellum
OrthoVellum
A living orthopaedic atlas

Exam-focused orthopaedic references, a question bank, viva practice, and spaced-repetition revision — with every clinical claim traceable to its source. Content is educational only and is not a substitute for local supervision, clinical judgement, or institutional policy.


Library

  • Clinical Topics
  • Blog
  • Exam Frequency Index
  • Site Updates
  • Content Methodology

Company

  • About Us
  • Authors & Disclosure
  • Editorial Team
  • Editorial Policy
  • Advertising Policy

Legal

  • Terms of Service
  • Privacy Policy
  • Cookie Policy
  • Medical Disclaimer
  • Copyright & DMCA

Support

  • Support OrthoVellum
  • Help Center
  • Contact
  • Accessibility
Evidence. Clarity. Practice.

© 2026 OrthoVellum. For educational purposes only.

Not medical advice. Verify clinically important information against current local guidance.

Arthroscopic SLAP Repair (Shoulder)

Operative SurgeryShoulder & Elbow
Shoulder & ElbowAdvancedCore Procedure

Arthroscopic SLAP Repair (Shoulder)

Operative technique guide for arthroscopic superior labrum anterior-to-posterior (SLAP) repair — Snyder classification, distinguishing true type II lesions from normal variants, suture anchor technique, role of biceps tenodesis, rehabilitation and return to overhead sport

Procedure console
25 min
Read
0
Sections
advanced
Level
Peer-reviewed · 2026-06-20
High-yield overview

Arthroscopic repair of unstable superior labral biceps anchor lesions — Snyder type II

Type IIThe unstable lesion
Peel-backConfirms instability
2-3 anchorsTypical construct
90 minTypical duration
Critical Must-Knows
  • Snyder type II is the classic unstable lesion requiring repair — the superior labrum and biceps anchor are detached from the glenoid with greater than 5 mm of mobility and a positive peel-back sign on external rotation and abduction. Type I is degenerative fraying (debride only); type III is bucket-handle (resect or repair the displaced fragment); type IV involves the biceps tendon (repair or tenodese depending on age and tissue quality).
  • True type II SLAP must be distinguished from normal variants: a sublabral foramen (present in up to 15 percent of shoulders — the labrum is attached to the glenoid but a recess exists anteriorly), a Buford complex (absent anterosuperior labrum with a cord-like middle glenohumeral ligament), and a meniscoid labrum (redundant superior labrum without detachment). These variants have no peel-back and no biceps anchor instability — repairing them causes iatrogenic stiffness.
  • MR arthrogram is the gold-standard imaging — intra-articular gadolinium improves sensitivity for labral detachment to greater than 90 percent. Look for contrast undercutting the superior labrum, biceps anchor displacement, and an associated paralabral cyst. Plain MRI has only 60-70 percent sensitivity for type II lesions.
  • Biceps tenodesis or tenotomy is increasingly first-line for type II SLAP in patients older than 40 years or with concomitant biceps pathology — multiple level I and II studies show equivalent or superior outcomes to repair with lower re-operation rates for stiffness and persistent pain.
Clinical Pearls
  • “
    The O'Brien active compression test has 67 percent sensitivity and 55 percent specificity for SLAP — positive when pain is elicited with the arm forward flexed 90 degrees, adducted 10-15 degrees, internally rotated (thumb down) and then externally rotated; pain that improves with external rotation suggests labral pathology.
  • “
    The dynamic labral shear test (modified O'Brien or O'Driscoll test) is performed with the arm abducted 90 degrees and externally rotated while the examiner applies an anterior shear force; reproduction of clicking or pain indicates an unstable superior labrum.
  • “
    Peel-back phenomenon is pathognomonic for unstable type II SLAP — viewed from the posterior portal with the arm in 90 degrees abduction and external rotation, the biceps-labral complex peels away from the posterosuperior glenoid; this is absent in normal variants.
  • “
    In overhead athletes (throwers, swimmers) always assess for GIRD (glenohumeral internal rotation deficit) and scapular dyskinesis pre-operatively — failure to address posterior capsular tightness leads to persistent pain and failed return to sport even after a technically successful labral repair.

When & Why


Indication. A symptomatic, unstable Snyder type II SLAP lesion — the superior labrum and biceps anchor detached from the glenoid with greater than 5 mm of mobility and a positive peel-back sign — that has failed an adequate trial of non-operative care (a minimum of 3 months of physiotherapy and activity modification). Up to 30 percent of SLAP tears have concomitant pathology (Bankart lesion, partial cuff tear, paralabral cyst), so the indication is set after a full diagnostic work-up. Confirm the diagnosis before offering surgery. MR arthrogram is the gold standard (sensitivity greater than 90 percent for labral detachment); look for contrast undercutting the superior labrum, biceps anchor displacement and a paralabral cyst. Bedside provocation tests support the diagnosis: the O'Brien active compression test (67 percent sensitivity), the dynamic labral shear test, and a focused assessment of glenohumeral rotation and scapular rhythm. Plain MRI is only 60-70 percent sensitive and should not be the sole basis for surgery. Non-operative treatment first. A structured programme of posterior capsular stretching (sleeper stretch, cross-body adduction), scapular stabilisation and rotator cuff endurance improves symptoms in 50-70 percent of overhead athletes at 3-6 months. A prospective cohort (Edwards, 2015) of 179 patients showed that 55 percent avoided surgery with this regimen. A corticosteroid injection into the glenohumeral joint or biceps sheath gives short-term relief in 40-60 percent and is most useful as a diagnostic test; it does not address the underlying detachment. The one decision that matters. Once a true unstable type II lesion is confirmed, the choice is between suture anchor repair and biceps tenodesis, driven by patient age, biceps tendon quality and sport demand:

Non-operative first

A 3-month structured programme of posterior capsular stretching, scapular stabilisation and rotator cuff endurance avoids surgery in roughly half of overhead athletes (Edwards 2015: 55 percent of 179 patients).

Suture anchor repair

For the unstable type II lesion in a patient under about 40 years with a healthy biceps, two or three all-suture anchors restore the native anchor; 87 percent good-to-excellent results at 2 years (Brockmeier 2009).

Biceps tenodesis

For the older patient (over 40) or with biceps tendinopathy, tenodesis of the degenerative anchor gives equivalent or superior outcomes with lower re-operation rates for stiffness and persistent pain (level I and II evidence).

Patient age
Suture anchor repair preferred
Less than 35-40 years
Biceps tenodesis preferred
Greater than 40-45 years
Biceps tendon quality
Suture anchor repair preferred
Healthy, no tendinopathy
Biceps tenodesis preferred
Degenerative changes or fraying
Sport demand
Suture anchor repair preferred
Overhead athlete (thrower, swimmer)
Biceps tenodesis preferred
Non-overhead or recreational
Associated pathology
Suture anchor repair preferred
Isolated SLAP, no cuff disease
Biceps tenodesis preferred
Concomitant biceps or cuff pathology
Re-operation risk
Suture anchor repair preferred
Higher stiffness rate (5-10 percent)
Biceps tenodesis preferred
Lower re-operation (2-4 percent)
Rehabilitation
Suture anchor repair preferred
Biceps protection for 12 weeks
Biceps tenodesis preferred
Earlier active biceps loading
Repair versus tenodesis — decision framework
FactorSuture anchor repair preferredBiceps tenodesis preferred
Patient ageLess than 35-40 yearsGreater than 40-45 years
Biceps tendon qualityHealthy, no tendinopathyDegenerative changes or fraying
Sport demandOverhead athlete (thrower, swimmer)Non-overhead or recreational
Associated pathologyIsolated SLAP, no cuff diseaseConcomitant biceps or cuff pathology
Re-operation riskHigher stiffness rate (5-10 percent)Lower re-operation (2-4 percent)
RehabilitationBiceps protection for 12 weeksEarlier active biceps loading

Contraindications. An asymptomatic SLAP lesion found incidentally (normal variants and degenerative changes are common and often painless) is not operated on. A type II lesion in a patient older than 50 with biceps tendinopathy is better managed by tenodesis. Isolated type I degenerative fraying without mechanical symptoms needs debridement only, if anything. Untreated GIRD greater than 20 degrees or scapular dyskinesis should be addressed before considering repair. Consent specifically for stiffness (5-10 percent requiring re-operation), persistent pain (10-15 percent), biceps anchor failure, anchor pull-out or chondral injury, suprascapular or axillary nerve injury (less than 1 percent), and the possibility of intra-operative conversion to biceps tenodesis if the tissue quality is poor.

The Operation


The goal of the procedure is to reattach the detached superior labrum and biceps anchor to the glenoid so that the peel-back sign is abolished, while protecting the articular cartilage and the suprascapular nerve. The portals are the exposure — they are established first and dictate the angles for debridement, anchor placement and suture passage, so they are laid out in full as the opening steps below.

Arthroscopic SLAP repair
Arthroscopic SLAP repair: a suture anchor stabilises the superior labrum-biceps anchor complex.Credit: OrthoVellum surgical illustration

Operative sequence

Step 1Positioning, anaesthesia & setup
  • Lateral decubitus on a beanbag with the operative arm in 20-30 degrees abduction, 10 degrees forward flexion and 5-10 pounds of traction. The lateral position is preferred because it allows dynamic peel-back testing by bringing the arm into 90 degrees abduction and external rotation. Beach-chair is an acceptable alternative but limits dynamic peel-back assessment.
  • General anaesthesia with an interscalene block for postoperative analgesia; hypotensive anaesthesia (mean arterial pressure 60-70 mmHg) improves visualisation. No tourniquet.
  • Confirm the pre-operative plan with the team: which arm, repair versus tenodesis contingent on arthroscopic findings, and whether a posterior capsular release for GIRD is planned.
Step 2Portal placement — the exposure
  • Posterior portal (primary viewing): 2 cm inferior and 1 cm medial to the posterolateral corner of the acromion. Establish this first and perform the diagnostic sweep with a 30-degree scope; switch to a 70-degree scope for the posterosuperior quadrant.
  • Anterior portal (working): lateral to the coracoid, through the rotator interval, for labral preparation and suture management. Place it slightly superior for a better angle on the superior labrum.
  • Anterosuperior (AS) portal: 1 cm lateral to the coracoid, through the rotator interval just anterior to the biceps tendon — the ideal portal for superior anchor placement and for biceps tenodesis preparation.
  • Neviaser (supraspinatus) portal: 1 cm medial to the acromion in the supraspinatus fossa, reserved for posterosuperior anchor placement when the angle from the anterior portal is too acute, and for viewing the peel-back phenomenon.
Step 3Diagnostic arthroscopy & dynamic peel-back testing
  • Perform a systematic 360-degree inspection: probe the superior labrum to assess mobility, and inspect for associated Bankart lesion, Hill-Sachs lesion, cuff tear and paralabral cyst (present in roughly 30 percent).
  • Dynamic peel-back test before any debridement: with the arm in 90 degrees abduction and external rotation, viewed from the posterior portal, look for the biceps-labral complex to peel away from the posterosuperior glenoid. If there is no peel-back and mobility is less than 5 mm, do not repair even if the labrum looks slightly elevated — it is likely a normal variant.
Step 4Labral preparation — the bony bed
  • Through the anterior working portal, use a shaver or radiofrequency device to debride degenerative tissue and create a bleeding bony bed on the glenoid neck.
  • For a type II lesion, elevate the labrum 5-8 mm medially to expose cancellous bone for healing.
  • Avoid excessive medial debridement — the suprascapular nerve lies only 1.5-2 cm medial to the glenoid rim at the spinoglenoid notch.
Step 5Anchor placement
  • Typically two or three 1.4-1.8 mm all-suture or PEEK anchors are placed at the 10:30, 12:00 and 1:30 o'clock positions on a right shoulder (or the mirror equivalents).
  • The drilling angle must be 45 degrees or greater to the glenoid surface to avoid articular cartilage penetration and anchor pull-out. The anterosuperior or Neviaser portal gives the optimal trajectory for the superior anchors.
Step 6Suture passage & knot tying
  • Pass sutures through the labrum with a suture lasso or penetrator, creating horizontal mattress or simple stitches that capture both the labrum and the biceps tendon fibres.
  • Tie arthroscopic knots (usually SMC or Weston) on the capsular side to avoid prominence on the articular surface. Do not over-tension, which can restrict external rotation.
Step 7Biceps tenodesis (when indicated)
  • If tenodesis is chosen (older patient, poor biceps quality): release the biceps from the labrum, whipstitch the tendon, and secure it in the bicipital groove with an interference screw or cortical button via the anterosuperior portal.
  • This eliminates the unstable anchor while preserving elbow flexion strength. Debride the superior labrum to a stable rim; do not attempt anchor repair.
Step 8Final assessment & closure
  • Reassess the repair with dynamic testing — there should be no peel-back and the biceps anchor should be stable to probing.
  • Close the portals with absorbable sutures and apply a sling with an abduction pillow.
Danger zones — structures at risk during the operation

Suprascapular nerve. It exits the spinoglenoid notch 1.5-2 cm medial to the glenoid rim; aggressive medial debridement or a stray drill/suture during anchor placement can injure it. Always identify the nerve when working medially and limit debridement to the labral margin. Axillary nerve. It lies 5-7 cm distal to the acromion and 2-3 cm inferior to the glenoid rim at the 6 o'clock position; it is at risk with inferior extension or a stray inferior portal — maintain arm abduction less than 45 degrees during inferior work. Articular cartilage. A drill angle less than 45 degrees risks penetration; a proud anchor causes chondral abrasion — always countersink or use knotless anchors flush with the glenoid.

Confirm peel-back before any debridement

Establish the posterior portal first and perform a diagnostic sweep with a 30-degree scope, then switch to a 70-degree scope for the superior labrum. Place an accessory anterosuperior portal just anterior to the biceps for anchor placement and suture passage. Reserve the Neviaser portal for posterosuperior anchors when the angle from the anterior portal is too acute. Before committing to repair, confirm peel-back by bringing the arm into 90 degrees abduction and external rotation while viewing from posterior — if there is no peel-back and mobility is less than 5 mm, this is a normal variant and should be left alone.

Aftercare & Complications


Rehabilitation | Phase | Timing | Milestones | Precautions | |-------|--------|------------|-------------| | 1 — Protection | 0-4 weeks | Sling with abduction pillow; pendular and elbow/wrist range of motion from day 1; scapular setting from week 2 | No active biceps contraction or resisted supination for 8 weeks | | 2 — Motion | 4-10 weeks | Wean sling at 4-6 weeks; passive and active-assisted forward flexion; external rotation to 30-45 degrees by week 8; sleeper stretch from week 8-10 | Avoid aggressive external rotation beyond the planned envelope | | 3 — Strengthening | 10-16 weeks | Full active range of motion by week 12; progressive cuff and scapular strengthening; resisted biceps loading from week 12 | Address any residual GIRD with posterior capsular mobilisation | | 4 — Sport-specific | 16 weeks to 6 months | Interval throwing programme at 4-5 months; return to competition at 6-9 months | Full painless range, greater than 90 percent strength symmetry, completed interval programme | Most non-overhead patients return to desk work within 2-3 weeks and to sport at 6-9 months. Overhead athletes return to their previous level at lower rates — 50 to 70 percent versus 85 to 95 percent in non-overhead patients — so realistic pre-operative counselling is essential. Return to sport is not guaranteed and averages 6-9 months; I insist on correction of GIRD and scapular dyskinesis before allowing a throwing programme. Overhead-athlete considerations. Pre-operative GIRD greater than 20 degrees should be addressed with a posterior capsular release at the time of SLAP repair. Biceps tenodesis is generally avoided in elite throwers under 30 years unless the biceps is clearly pathologic, as the native anchor contributes to dynamic stability during late cocking. If persistent posterior tightness remains at 3 months, an arthroscopic posterior capsular release is considered before progressing the throwing programme. Complications

Stiffness requiring re-operation
Suture anchor repair
5-10 percent
Biceps tenodesis
2-4 percent
Prevention and management
Early gentle mobilisation; address GIRD pre-operatively
Persistent pain at 1 year
Suture anchor repair
10-15 percent
Biceps tenodesis
5-8 percent
Prevention and management
Careful patient selection; assess biceps quality
Anchor or hardware failure
Suture anchor repair
2-4 percent
Biceps tenodesis
1-2 percent
Prevention and management
Appropriate anchor choice; avoid proud placement
Nerve injury (suprascapular or axillary)
Suture anchor repair
Less than 1 percent
Biceps tenodesis
Less than 1 percent
Prevention and management
70-degree scope; identify the nerve medially
Infection
Suture anchor repair
Less than 0.5 percent
Biceps tenodesis
Less than 0.5 percent
Prevention and management
Standard arthroscopic sterile technique
Popeye deformity
Suture anchor repair
Not applicable
Biceps tenodesis
3-8 percent (cosmetic)
Prevention and management
Anatomic groove placement; counsel the patient
Complication rates — SLAP repair versus tenodesis
ComplicationSuture anchor repairBiceps tenodesisPrevention and management
Stiffness requiring re-operation5-10 percent2-4 percentEarly gentle mobilisation; address GIRD pre-operatively
Persistent pain at 1 year10-15 percent5-8 percentCareful patient selection; assess biceps quality
Anchor or hardware failure2-4 percent1-2 percentAppropriate anchor choice; avoid proud placement
Nerve injury (suprascapular or axillary)Less than 1 percentLess than 1 percent70-degree scope; identify the nerve medially
InfectionLess than 0.5 percentLess than 0.5 percentStandard arthroscopic sterile technique
Popeye deformityNot applicable3-8 percent (cosmetic)Anatomic groove placement; counsel the patient

Persistent pain and failure. Causes include missed concomitant pathology (GIRD, Bankart lesion, cuff tear), poor tissue quality, an over-tensioned repair, anchor chondral injury, or untreated biceps tendinopathy. The overall re-operation rate is 5-10 percent and is higher in overhead athletes (up to 19 percent in some series). Revision options are biceps tenodesis (the most common), capsular release, or debridement of the failed repair.

Viva & Exam Focus


Mnemonic

S.L.A.P.Snyder classification and decision making

S
Snyder classification
Type I debride, type II repair or tenodese, type III resect or repair the fragment, type IV depends on age and tendon quality
L
Labral mobility
Greater than 5 mm detachment plus positive peel-back on abduction-external rotation confirms unstable type II; variants have less than 5 mm and no peel-back
A
Age and biceps quality
Under 40 years with a healthy biceps favours suture anchor repair; over 40 or biceps tendinopathy favours tenodesis
P
Portal strategy
Posterior viewing, anterior working, accessory anterosuperior or Neviaser for anchors; a 70-degree scope for the posterosuperior quadrant
Mnemonic

D.I.A.G.N.O.S.E.Confirming a true unstable SLAP before surgery

D
Dynamic labral shear
Under anaesthesia with the arm abducted 90 degrees, apply an anterior shear — clicking or reproduced pain indicates instability
I
Imaging
MR arthrogram with gadolinium — contrast undercutting the superior labrum, biceps displacement, paralabral cyst; sensitivity greater than 90 percent
A
Associated lesions
Always inspect 360 degrees for Bankart, Hill-Sachs, cuff tear and GIRD — about 30 percent have concomitant pathology
G
Glenohumeral rotation
Measure internal and external rotation at 90 degrees abduction; address GIRD greater than 20 degrees with posterior capsular release if present
N
Normal variants
Buford complex (cord-like MGHL, absent anterosuperior labrum), sublabral foramen (recess without detachment), meniscoid labrum — do not repair
O
O'Brien test
Pain with thumb-down forward flexion-adduction-internal rotation that improves with external rotation; 67 percent sensitivity
S
Scapular dyskinesis
Assess winging and rhythm pre-operatively; correct with therapy or address at surgery to optimise outcomes
E
Exam under anaesthesia
Compare to the contralateral shoulder, document range, instability grades and peel-back before portal placement

Clinical Decision Scenarios

Practise clinical reasoning and management decisions out loud

Viva scenarioAdvanced
Clinical prompt

“A 28-year-old professional baseball pitcher presents with 8 months of posterior shoulder pain during late cocking and acceleration. MR arthrogram shows a type II SLAP lesion with 7 mm detachment and a small paralabral cyst. O'Brien test is positive. How do you manage this patient?”

Viva scenarioAdvanced
Clinical prompt

“A 52-year-old recreational tennis player has a type II SLAP lesion confirmed on MR arthrogram. She has failed 4 months of physiotherapy. During arthroscopy the biceps tendon shows moderate fraying and the labral tissue is degenerative. What is your operative plan?”

Viva scenarioModerate
Clinical prompt

“You are performing arthroscopy on a 35-year-old patient with shoulder pain. You identify what appears to be a type II SLAP lesion with 6 mm of labral mobility. However, when you bring the arm into abduction-external rotation there is no peel-back sign. What do you do?”

Exam day cheat sheet
Arthroscopic SLAP repair — exam-day essentials

Snyder classification

  • Type I: degenerative fraying — debride only
  • Type II: unstable biceps anchor detachment with peel-back — repair or tenodese
  • Type III: bucket-handle tear — resect or repair the fragment
  • Type IV: biceps tendon involvement greater than 30 percent — repair or tenodese based on age and quality
  • True type II requires greater than 5 mm mobility PLUS positive peel-back on abduction-external rotation

Normal variants — do not repair

  • Sublabral foramen: 10-15 percent prevalence; recess without biceps detachment; no peel-back
  • Buford complex: absent anterosuperior labrum plus cord-like MGHL; repair causes stiffness
  • Meniscoid labrum: redundant but attached; no detachment or peel-back
  • Distinguishing test: probe mobility less than 5 mm and absent peel-back equals a variant

Diagnosis

  • O'Brien active compression: 67 percent sensitivity; pain in thumb-down position improves with external rotation
  • Dynamic labral shear: arm abducted 90 degrees, anterior shear force reproduces clicking or pain
  • MR arthrogram: greater than 90 percent sensitivity; contrast undercutting, biceps displacement, paralabral cyst
  • Always assess GIRD and scapular dyskinesis — address before or at surgery

Surgical decision making

  • Under 40 years, healthy biceps, overhead athlete — suture anchor repair preferred
  • Over 40 years or biceps degeneration — biceps tenodesis preferred; lower re-operation rate
  • Two to three 1.4-1.8 mm anchors at 10:30, 12:00 and 1:30 (right shoulder)
  • Horizontal mattress sutures capturing labrum and biceps fibres; knots on the capsular side

Key portals and positioning

  • Lateral decubitus allows dynamic peel-back testing in abduction-external rotation
  • Posterior viewing, anterior working, anterosuperior accessory for anchors
  • Neviaser portal for posterosuperior access when the anterior angle is poor
  • 70-degree scope essential for the posterosuperior labrum and suprascapular nerve visualisation

Danger zones

  • Suprascapular nerve: 1.5-2 cm medial to the glenoid at the spinoglenoid notch — limit medial debridement
  • Axillary nerve: 5-7 cm distal to the acromion — protect during inferior work
  • Articular penetration: drill angle must be greater than 45 degrees to the glenoid surface
  • Proud anchor: causes chondral wear — always countersink or use knotless flush anchors

Complications

  • Stiffness: 5-15 percent; higher with repair than tenodesis; manage with prolonged therapy or capsular release
  • Persistent pain: 10-15 percent after repair; consider missed GIRD, Bankart or biceps pathology
  • Anchor failure or chondral injury: 2-4 percent; prevented by correct trajectory and countersinking
  • Nerve injury: less than 1 percent; suprascapular most common with medial work

Rehabilitation milestones

  • Sling for 4-6 weeks; no biceps loading for 8-12 weeks
  • External rotation progression: 0 degrees abduction week 4-6, 90 degrees by week 10-12
  • Interval throwing: 4-5 months; return to competition 6-9 months
  • Overhead athletes: correct GIRD and scapular dyskinesis before the throwing programme

Background & Evidence


Epidemiology. SLAP lesions are most common in overhead athletes and in patients aged 20-40 years, with an increased incidence of degenerative type I and II changes after the fourth decade. They are frequently associated with instability, rotator cuff disease and trauma (a fall on an outstretched arm or a traction injury). Roughly 30 percent of SLAP tears have concomitant pathology. Pathoanatomy. The long head of biceps originates from the supraglenoid tubercle and superior labrum; the superior labrum is a fibrocartilaginous structure continuous with the biceps tendon that stabilises the biceps anchor and contributes to glenohumeral stability through the superior and middle glenohumeral ligaments. The superior labrum is relatively hypovascular in its inner third, which explains its poor healing potential without repair, and it receives proprioceptive innervation from branches of the suprascapular and lateral pectoral nerves — explaining referred pain to the lateral shoulder and biceps.

I
Description
Degenerative fraying of the superior labrum with an intact biceps anchor
Management
Debride only; no repair
II
Description
Detachment of the biceps-labral complex from the superior glenoid with peel-back
Management
Suture anchor repair in the young; tenodesis in the older patient
III
Description
Bucket-handle tear of the labrum; the biceps anchor remains attached
Management
Resect or repair the displaced fragment based on size and reducibility
IV
Description
Bucket-handle tear extending into the biceps tendon (greater than 30 percent)
Management
Repair if young with healthy tendon; tenodese if degenerative or older
Snyder classification of SLAP lesions
TypeDescriptionManagement
IDegenerative fraying of the superior labrum with an intact biceps anchorDebride only; no repair
IIDetachment of the biceps-labral complex from the superior glenoid with peel-backSuture anchor repair in the young; tenodesis in the older patient
IIIBucket-handle tear of the labrum; the biceps anchor remains attachedResect or repair the displaced fragment based on size and reducibility
IVBucket-handle tear extending into the biceps tendon (greater than 30 percent)Repair if young with healthy tendon; tenodese if degenerative or older
Sublabral foramen
Labral mobility
Recess up to 5 mm, intact anchor
Peel-back
Absent
Action
Do not repair (10-15 percent prevalence)
Buford complex
Labral mobility
Absent anterosuperior labrum with cord-like MGHL
Peel-back
Absent
Action
Do not repair — causes stiffness and loss of external rotation
Meniscoid labrum
Labral mobility
Redundant but attached
Peel-back
Absent
Action
Do not repair; observe
True type II SLAP
Labral mobility
Greater than 5 mm detachment
Peel-back
Present
Action
Repair or tenodese based on age and biceps quality
Normal variants versus true type II SLAP — the distinction that prevents iatrogenic harm
FindingLabral mobilityPeel-backAction
Sublabral foramenRecess up to 5 mm, intact anchorAbsentDo not repair (10-15 percent prevalence)
Buford complexAbsent anterosuperior labrum with cord-like MGHLAbsentDo not repair — causes stiffness and loss of external rotation
Meniscoid labrumRedundant but attachedAbsentDo not repair; observe
True type II SLAPGreater than 5 mm detachmentPresentRepair or tenodese based on age and biceps quality

Key evidence. Brockmeier (2009, level II) reported 87 percent good-to-excellent results at 2 years in 47 patients after type II SLAP repair, with return to sport in 74 percent of overhead athletes. Gorantla (2010, level III systematic review) found a mean return to sport at the previous level of 63-85 percent, lower in overhead than in non-overhead athletes. Multiple level I and II studies, including a randomised trial by Cvetanovich (2020), show that biceps tenodesis in patients older than 40 years yields equivalent or superior outcomes to repair with lower re-operation rates for stiffness and failure, and a 2021 systematic review confirmed reliable pain relief and return to sport with tenodesis when biceps pathology coexists. The consistent message — repair the unstable young anchor, tenodese the degenerative older anchor, and never operate on a normal variant — is the core of every SLAP viva.

References


Evidence

Outcomes after arthroscopic repair of type-II SLAP lesions.

Level II
Brockmeier SF, Voos JE, Williams RJ 3rd, Altchek DW, Cordasco FA, Allen AA • J Bone Joint Surg Am (2009)
Key Findings:
  • 47 patients (mean age 34) with isolated type II SLAP underwent suture anchor repair
  • Mean ASES improved from 48 to 87; 87 percent good-to-excellent results at 2 years
  • Return to sport at previous level: 74 percent of overhead athletes
Clinical implication: Suture anchor repair provides reliable pain relief and functional improvement in appropriately selected younger patients.
Source: J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2009 Jul;91(7):1595-603
Verify on PubMed (PMID 19571081)
Evidence

The outcome of type II SLAP repair: a systematic review.

Level III
Gorantla K, Gill C, Wright RW • Arthroscopy (2010)
Key Findings:
  • Systematic review of multiple studies on type II SLAP repair outcomes
  • Mean return to sport 63-85 percent at previous level overall
  • Overhead athletes had lower return rates than non-overhead athletes
Clinical implication: Counsel overhead athletes realistically about return-to-sport rates; address GIRD and scapular dyskinesis pre-operatively to optimise outcomes.
Source: Arthroscopy. 2010 Apr;26(4):537-45
Verify on PubMed (PMID 20362836)
Evidence

Return to Sport at Preinjury Level is Common After Surgical Treatment of SLAP Lesions: A Systematic Review and a Meta-analysis.

Level III
Multiple authors (meta-analysis) • Sports Med Arthrosc Rev (2024)
Key Findings:
  • Meta-analysis confirms high rates of return to preinjury sport after SLAP repair or tenodesis
  • Return to sport at preinjury level is common with modern techniques
  • Patient selection and addressing concomitant pathology are key to success
Clinical implication: Modern surgical management of SLAP lesions allows most athletes to return to preinjury level when appropriately indicated.
Source: Sports Med Arthrosc Rev. 2024 Mar 1;32(1):2-11
Verify on PubMed (PMID 38695497)
Evidence

Biceps Tenodesis for Superior Labrum Anterior-Posterior Tear in the Overhead Athlete: A Systematic Review.

Level III
Multiple authors (systematic review) • Am J Sports Med (2021)
Key Findings:
  • Systematic review of biceps tenodesis outcomes for SLAP tears in overhead athletes
  • Tenodesis provides reliable pain relief and return to sport in appropriately selected patients
  • Particularly effective when biceps pathology coexists or in older athletes
Clinical implication: Biceps tenodesis is a viable alternative to repair in overhead athletes with SLAP tears, especially with concomitant biceps disease.
Source: Am J Sports Med. 2021 Feb;49(2):522-528
Verify on PubMed (PMID 32579853)
Editorially reviewed — transparent references and correction processPublished by OrthoVellum Medical Education TeamEditorial boardMethodologyReview policy
Educational disclosure

Educational content is reviewed for source visibility, editorial coherence, and correction readiness.

No individual clinician credential is claimed unless a named person is shown.

Verify before clinical use; this is not medical advice or a substitute for local guidance.

Procedure console
25 min
Read
0
Sections
advanced
Level
Peer-reviewed · 2026-06-20
Procedure info
Level
advanced
Read time
25 min
Updated
2026-06-20
SURGICAL APPROACHES USED
Shoulder Arthroscopy Approach
Browse all procedures