ArticleJSES international2025
Evaluation of a curved intramedullary button vs. traditional flat button for proximal biceps tenodesis: a biomechanical study.
Article in JSES international, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Although variations in fixation techniques for proximal biceps tenodesis have been evaluated by different biomechanical studies, the optimal fixation technique remains unclear. To further advance the biceps tenodesis technique using unicortical button, a novel curved button was developed. This study aimed to compare the time-zero biomechanical performance of a curved intramedullary button with that of a standard flat button in proximal biceps tenodesis. Methods: A total of 16 cadaveric fresh-frozen shoulders were randomly allocated to undergo proximal biceps tenodesis using either a standard flat button or the new curved button (developed by Materialise, Leuven, Belgium). Following the tenodesis, the biceps tendon was subjected to a cyclic load, ranging from 5 to 100N, at a frequency of 2.5 Hz for a total of 1000 cycles. After this, the tendon was loaded to failure. During testing, displacement after cyclic loading, ultimate failure load, stiffness, and modes of failure were evaluated. Results: All 16 specimens were included in the data analysis. No failure occurred during cyclic testing. After cyclic testing, the median displacement was 10.4 mm (6.1-16.1) for curved button and 11.9 mm (6.0-43.9) for flat button ( Conclusions: In this time-zero in-vitro study, the curved and flat buttons exhibited similar biomechanical properties in terms of displacement, load to failure, and stiffness. Considering these results and the theoretical advantages of the curved button, this technique could be a new alternative for the treatment of proximal long-head biceps tendon pathology.
Indexed as
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.