ArticleArthroscopy, sports medicine, and rehabilitation2024
All-Suture Anchor Techniques for Biceps Tenodesis Are Noninferior in End-Cycle Stiffness to an Interference Screw Technique; However, Secondary Outcomes, Such as Ultimate Failure Load, Yield Load, Creep, and Load-to-Failure Stiffness, Are Inferior in an Ovine Model.
Article in Arthroscopy, sports medicine, and rehabilitation, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Arthroscopic biceps tenodesis: Inlay or onlay technique?Ulusal travma ve acil cerrahi dergisi = Turkish journal of trauma & emergency surgery : TJTES · 2026Article
- Bone Quality Positively Correlates With Biomechanical Strength of All-Suture Anchors Utilized in Biceps Tenodesis.Orthopaedic journal of sports medicine · 2026Article
- Intra-articular Double-Anchor Double-Loop Figure-of-Eight Transtendon Long Head of the Biceps Tendon Tenodesis.Arthroscopy techniques · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: To assess the biomechanical performance of 2 simplified loop-and-tack biceps tenodesis techniques, all-suture anchor and all-suture anchor with a button, compared with the interference screw technique in an ovine model. Methods: Twenty-one biceps tenodesis procedures were executed on the humeri and flexor digitorum profundus tendons of skeletally mature, female sheep. Limbs were evenly randomized into 2 experimental groups (all-suture anchor with or without button) and 1 control group (interference screw). Cyclic loading followed by a load-to-failure test was conducted. The primary outcome metric was end-cycle stiffness, or stiffness measured at the end of cyclic loading, because it modeled the resistance of the construct to the lower-force activities of postoperative physical therapy. Secondary metrics included ultimate failure load (UFL), yield load, creep, and load-to-failure stiffness. End-cycle stiffness difference-of-means testing was conducted with a minimal clinically important difference threshold of -15 N/mm (-1.5 kg/mm). Groups were compared using analysis of variance for all recorded variables. Results: Both the all-suture anchor techniques, without a button and with a button, were found to be noninferior in end-cycle stiffness to the interference screw technique (-5.2 N/mm [95% confidence interval, -13.6 to 3.3 N/mm] and -3.8 N/mm [95% confidence interval, -12.5 to -4.9 N/mm], respectively) with a minimal clinically important difference of -15 N/mm. The all-suture techniques showed significantly lower UFL, lower yield load, greater creep, and lower load-to-failure stiffness ( Conclusions: Under subfailure loading conditions, the all-suture anchor techniques with a button and without a button showed end-cycle stiffness noninferiority to an interference screw technique; however, these techniques were inferior in all secondary outcomes, including significantly lower UFL, lower yield load, greater creep, and lower load-to-failure stiffness. Clinical Relevance: The all-suture anchor approaches with a button and without a button may retain the natural length-tension dynamics of the long head of the biceps tendon because fixation can occur before the release of the tendon origin. Additionally, they may offer a simpler and more cost-effective alternative to prevailing arthroscopic methods.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.