Literature DB >> 21493102

Suprapectoral or subpectoral position for biceps tenodesis: biomechanical comparison of four different techniques in both positions.

Thilo Patzer1, Gerwin Santo, Gavin D Olender, Mathias Wellmann, Christof Hurschler, Markus D Schofer.   

Abstract

HYPOTHESIS: The aim of this study was to compare different techniques for tenodesis of the long head of biceps tendon (LHB) in the suprapectoral and subpectoral position to test the hypothesis that using shorter screws at the subpectoral position would achieve a similar primary ultimate failure load (UFL) as the longer screws at the suprapectoral position, that both types of tenodesis screws achieve comparable UFL, and that knotless suture anchor techniques can be performed at the subpectoral position in cortical bone and reach a UFL similar to tenodesis screws.
METHODS: On 42 fresh frozen human cadavers divided into 6 groups, 4 different techniques for LHB tenodesis were performed localized 10 mm and 50 mm, respectively, distal to the entrance of the bicipital groove. Two techniques with tenodesis screws (Bio-Tenodesis screw, Biceptor) and 2 with knotless suture anchors (Bio-SwiveLock, Footprint PK) were tested. Under a 10-N preload, an axial cyclic load with 100 cycles, 1-Hz frequency, and 50-N maximal load was applied. UFL was evaluated with an axial traction of 0.2 mm/s until decrease of tension. LHB dislocation was measured by 3-dimensional photogrammetry.
RESULTS: All techniques except the subpectoral Bio-SwiveLock had a dislocation <3 mm after cyclic loading. The highest mean UFL was measured for the suprapectoral Bio-Tenodesis screw (218.3 ± 59.7 N) and the lowest with the subpectoral Footprint PK (99.1 ± 16.4 N). The UFL of suture anchors were significantly lower than those of interference screws (P < .01). UFL was not significantly different for type of interference screw, the type of suture anchor, or tenodesis localization. Different failure mechanisms were evaluated for suture anchors and interference screws.
CONCLUSION: Due to the biomechanical testings interference screws are appropriate devices for suprapectoral and subpectoral biceps tenodesis resisting cyclic loading and attaining a satisfactory, whereas the knotless suture anchors sustained a significant about 50% lower UFL, and can only be recommended conditionally for LHB tenodesis regarding primary stability.
Copyright © 2012 Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery Board of Trustees. Published by Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21493102     DOI: 10.1016/j.jse.2011.01.022

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Shoulder Elbow Surg        ISSN: 1058-2746            Impact factor:   3.019


  28 in total

1.  The influence of suprapectoral arthroscopic biceps tenodesis for isolated biceps lesions on elbow flexion force and clinical outcomes.

Authors:  Martin Hufeland; Carina Kolem; Christoph Ziskoven; Jörn Kircher; Rüdiger Krauspe; Thilo Patzer
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2015-11-12       Impact factor: 4.342

2.  Arthroscopic suture anchor tenodesis: loop-suture technique.

Authors:  Min Soo Shon; Kyoung Hwan Koh; Tae Kang Lim; Seung Won Lee; Young Eun Park; Jae Chul Yoo
Journal:  Arthrosc Tech       Date:  2013-03-29

3.  Biomechanical characterization of unicortical button fixation: a novel technique for proximal subpectoral biceps tenodesis.

Authors:  Joseph P DeAngelis; Alvin Chen; Michael Wexler; Benjamin Hertz; Leandro Grimaldi Bournissaint; Ara Nazarian; Arun J Ramappa
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2013-11-20       Impact factor: 4.342

4.  The new LassoLoop360° technique for biomechanically superior tissue grip.

Authors:  Sebastian Müller; Rebekka Flury; Simon Zimmermann; Michael de Wild; Simon Fogerty; Laurent Lafosse; Vito Bongiorno; Claudio Rosso
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2019-06-28       Impact factor: 4.342

5.  [Subpectoral tenodesis of the long head of the biceps tendon for pathologies of the long head of the biceps tendon and the biceps pulley].

Authors:  S Braun; P Minzlaff; A B Imhoff
Journal:  Oper Orthop Traumatol       Date:  2012-11       Impact factor: 1.154

6.  [Subpectoral tenodesis of the long head of the biceps tendon with an interference screw and a cortical button : Clinical and cosmetic results after 1 year].

Authors:  P-C Nolte; N Pister; F Holz; M Egenolf; T Chatterjee
Journal:  Orthopade       Date:  2017-10       Impact factor: 1.087

7.  The biomechanical performance of a new forked knotless biceps tenodesis compared to a knotless and suture anchor tenodesis.

Authors:  Olaf Lorbach; Christian Trennheuser; Dieter Kohn; Konstantinos Anagnostakos
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2014-10-08       Impact factor: 4.342

8.  Biomechanical properties of tenotomy versus biceps knot in a cadaver model.

Authors:  Micah Lissy; Amanda Esquivel; Allison Cracchiolo; Stephen Lemos
Journal:  J Orthop       Date:  2016-05-06

Review 9.  Outcomes following long head of biceps tendon tenodesis.

Authors:  Saad M AlQahtani; Ryan T Bicknell
Journal:  Curr Rev Musculoskelet Med       Date:  2016-12

10.  Biomechanical consequences of proximal biceps tenodesis stitch location: musculotendinous junction versus tendon only.

Authors:  Ulrich J Spiegl; Sean D Smith; Simon A Euler; Peter J Millett; Coen A Wijdicks
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2014-06-27       Impact factor: 4.342

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.