Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36579049›Full record

ArticleArthroscopy, sports medicine, and rehabilitation2022

All-Suture Suspensory Button Has Similar Biomechanical Performance to Metal Suspensory Button for Onlay Subpectoral Biceps Tenodesis.

Donald F Colantonio, Christopher J Tucker, Timothy P Murphy, Patrick K Mescher, Anthony H Le, Robert M Putko, Erik R Holm, Robert Weishar, Tarun K Vippa, Theodore N Rudic and 1 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Arthroscopy, sports medicine, and rehabilitation, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
0.9field-weighted citation impact, top 26% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Suprapectoral Onlay Biceps Tenodesis With Metal Button or Soft-Body Anchor Is Safe and Effective During Total Shoulder Arthroplasty.Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons. Global research & reviews · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Donald F ColantonioDepartment of Orthopaedics, Walter Reed National Military Medical Center, Bethesda, Maryland.
Christopher J TuckerDepartment of Orthopaedics, Walter Reed National Military Medical Center, Bethesda, Maryland.
Timothy P MurphyDepartment of Orthopaedics, Walter Reed National Military Medical Center, Bethesda, Maryland.
Patrick K MescherDepartment of Orthopaedics, Walter Reed National Military Medical Center, Bethesda, Maryland.
Anthony H LeDepartment of Defense-Veterans Affairs Extremity Trauma and Amputation Center of Excellence, USA.
Robert M PutkoDepartment of Orthopaedics, Walter Reed National Military Medical Center, Bethesda, Maryland.
Erik R HolmWalter Reed National Military Medical Center, Bethesda, Maryland, Department of Surgery, Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences, Bethesda, Maryland.
Robert WeisharWalter Reed National Military Medical Center, Bethesda, Maryland, Department of Surgery, Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences, Bethesda, Maryland.
Tarun K VippaDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Inova Health System, Fairfax, Virginia, USA.
Theodore N RudicDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Inova Health System, Fairfax, Virginia, USA.
Edward S ChangWalter Reed National Military Medical Center, Bethesda, Maryland, Department of Surgery, Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences, Bethesda, Maryland.
Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences · USInova Health System · USUnited States Department of Defense · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Purpose: To evaluate the maximal load at failure, cyclic displacement, and stiffness of onlay subpectoral biceps tenodesis (BT) with an intramedullary unicortical metal button (MB) versus a unicortical all-suture button (ASB). Methods: Eighteen matched paired human cadaveric proximal humeri were randomly allocated for subpectoral BT with either ASB or MB using a high-strength suture. Specimens were tested on a servohydraulic mechanical testing apparatus under cyclic load for 1,000 cycles and then loaded to failure. The clamp was then adjusted to isolate the suture-anchor point interface and loaded to failure. Maximal load to failure, displacement, and stiffness were compared. Results: There was no significant difference between groups in stiffness, displacement, or yield load. The maximal load to failure for the MB was greater than the ASB (347.6 ± 74.1N vs 266.5 ± 69.3N, Conclusions: This study demonstrates that the MB and ASB have similar biomechanical performance when used in subpectoral BT. Although the MB showed statistically significant greater maximal load to failure, there was no difference between the MB and ASB when the suture-tendon interface was eliminated. Suture pull-through was the most common mode of failure for both implants, underscoring the importance of the suture-tendon interface. Clinical Relevance: Fixation techniques for the treatment of long head of the biceps brachii tenodesis continue to evolve. The use of an all-suture suspensory button has advantages, but it is important to understand if this implant is a biomechanically suitable alternative to a metal suspensory button.

Identifiers

PMID36579049
PMCPMC9791876
OpenAlexW4306683249

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.