Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41356542›Full record

ArticleClinics in orthopedic surgery2025

Enhanced Rotational Stability with the Locking Anchor EndoButton System: A Biomechanical Comparison of Free Bone Graft Non-Screw Methods for Anterior Shoulder Instability.

Muhammed Furkan Tosun, Ethem Burak Oklaz, İbrahim Kaya, Fatma Kübra Erbay Elibol, Elif Naz Perdeci, Teyfik Demir, Tolga Tolunay, Ulunay Kanatlı

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Clinics in orthopedic surgery, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

8 authors.

Muhammed Furkan TosunDepartment of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, Yıldırım Beyazıt University Yenimahalle Training and Research Hospital, Ankara, Türkiye.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9085-7136
Ethem Burak OklazDepartment of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, Gazi University Faculty of Medicine, Ankara, Türkiye.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6241-8523
İbrahim KayaDepartment of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, Dr. Abdurrahman Yurtaslan Ankara Oncology Training and Research Hospital, Ankara, Türkiye.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8205-6515
Fatma Kübra Erbay ElibolDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, TOBB University of Economics and Technology, Ankara, Türkiye.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4117-1098
Elif Naz PerdeciDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, TOBB University of Economics and Technology, Ankara, Türkiye.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0002-2857-448X
Teyfik DemirDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, TOBB University of Economics and Technology, Ankara, Türkiye.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6352-8302
Tolga TolunayDepartment of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, Gazi University Faculty of Medicine, Ankara, Türkiye.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1998-3695
Ulunay KanatlıDepartment of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, Gazi University Faculty of Medicine, Ankara, Türkiye.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9807-9305

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Backgroud: Despite the increasing use of non-screw free bone graft fixation methods for glenoid defects associated with anterior shoulder instability, biomechanical knowledge of their effectiveness remains limited. This study aims to evaluate the biomechanical stability of different non-screw iliac crest graft fixation methods for anterior shoulder instability. Methods: Forty-eight scapula bone models were used to compare the mechanical properties of non-screw fixation methods. The amples were divided into 4 groups: group 1 with 2 anchors, group 2 with 2 EndoButtons, group 3 with a combination of 2 anchors and 1 EndoButton, and group 4 with the Locking Anchor EndoButton System (LAES). Following fixation, dynamic testing began with a 10-N preload. After the preload, cyclic loading was applied between 10 N and 150 N for 100 cycles. Static loading was then conducted at a rate of 0.08 mm/sec. The test continued until either system failure occurred or the graft displacement reached 7 mm. Stiffness and maximum load values were determined. Rotational tests were performed at an angular velocity of 10°/sec. Torsional stiffness and maximum torque capacity were determined. Results: Under dynamic loading conditions, the LAES group exhibited significantly less displacement compared to all other groups, while no significant differences were observed among the remaining groups. In static testing, the LAES group demonstrated the highest stiffness (183.354 ± 33.295 N/mm), significantly exceeding that of the Anchor group (93.847 ± 20.401 N/mm) and Anchor-EndoButton group (135.036 ± 37.815 N/mm). The EndoButton and LAES groups withstood significantly higher maximum loads than the Anchor and Anchor-EndoButton groups, with the LAES group achieving the highest load capacity (543.333 ± 100.851 N). In rotational testing, the LAES group displayed significantly greater torsional stiffness (0.182 ± 0.063 N·m/°) compared to all other groups. Additionally, the LAES group withstood the highest maximum torque (3.068 ± 1.194 N·m), significantly surpassing the Anchor, EndoButton, and Anchor-EndoButton groups. Conclusions: All tested fixation methods provided sufficient stability under early postoperative loading conditions. However, the LAES demonstrated superior biomechanical performance, particularly in terms of rotational stability, compared to other non-screw fixation techniques.

Indexed as

Bone TransplantationJoint InstabilityShoulder JointSuture AnchorsBiomechanical PhenomenaHumansRotationScapulaBiomechanicsFree bone graftGlenohumeral instabilityGlenoid reconstruction

Identifiers

PMID41356542
PMCPMC12676928

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.