Interference Screw Technique Research Articles

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

PurposeThe purpose of this study was to assess the biomechanical performance of two simplified loop and tack biceps tenodesis techniques, all-suture anchor and all-suture anchor with a button, compared to the interference screw technique in an ovine model. MethodsTwenty-one biceps tenodesis procedures were executed on the humeri and flexor digitorum profundus tendons of skeletally mature, female sheep. Limbs were evenly randomized into two experimental groups (all-suture anchor with/without button) and one 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, as 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 significant difference (MCID) threshold of -15N/mm (1.5kg/mm). Groups were compared using ANOVA for all recorded variables. ResultsBoth the all-suture anchor and all-suture anchor with button techniques were found to be noninferior in end-cycle stiffness compared to the interference screw technique (-5.2N/mm, 95% CI [-13.6, 3.3] and –3.8N/mm, 95% CI [-12.5, -4.9]) for -15N/mm MCID. The all-suture techniques showed significantly lower UFL, lower yield load, greater creep, and lower load-to-failure stiffness (P<0.001, P<0.001, P=0.002, P<0.001, respectively). Tendon dimensions did not vary significantly across groups. ConclusionsUnder subfailure loading conditions, the all-suture anchor with/without button techniques demonstrated end-cycle stiffness noninferiority with 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 RelevanceThe all-suture anchor with/without button approaches may retain the natural length-tension dynamics of the long head biceps tendon as fixation can occur before releasing the tendon origin. Additionally, it may offer a simpler and more cost-effective alternative to prevailing arthroscopic methods.

BIOMECHANICAL STUDY COMPARING THE DOUBLE-LASSO LOOP TECHNIQUE TO INTERFERENCE SCREW FIXATION FOR BICEPS TENODESIS IN AN OVINE MODEL

This study aims to compare the biomechanical properties of the “Double Lasso-Loop” suture anchor (DLSA) technique with the commonly performed interference screw (IS) technique in an ex vivo ovine model.Fourteen fresh sheep shoulder specimens were used in this study. Dissection was performed leaving only the biceps muscle attached to the humerus and proximal radius before sharply incised to simulate long head of biceps tendon (LHBT) tear. Repair of the LHBT tear was performed on all specimens using either DSLA or IS technique. Cyclical loading of 500 cycles followed by load to failure was performed on all specimens. Tendon displacement due to the cyclical loading at every 100 cycles as well as the maximum load at failure were recorded and analysed. Stiffness was also calculated from the load displacement graph during load to failure testing.No statistically significant difference in tendon displacement was observed from 200 to 500 cycles. Statistically significant higher stiffness was observed in IS when compared with DSLA (P = .005). Similarly, IS demonstrated significantly higher ultimate failure load as compared with DSLA (P = .001). Modes of failure observed for DSLA was mostly due to suture failure (7/8) and anchor pull-out (1/8) while IS resulted in mostly LHBT (4/6) or biceps (2/6) tears. DSLA failure load were compared with previous studies and similar results were noted.After cyclical loading, tendon displacement in DLSA technique was not significantly different from IS technique. Despite the higher failure loads associated with IS techniques in the present study, absolute peak load characteristics of DLSA were similar to previous studies. Hence, DLSA technique can be considered as a suitable alternative to IS fixation for biceps tenodesis.

Traumatic Great Toe MCL Avulsion in Professional Athlete Treated Surgically with MCL Repair with Suture Tape Augmentation Allowing Rapid Return to Sport

Category: Sports; Midfoot/Forefoot; Trauma Introduction/Purpose: Acute medial collateral ligament (MCL) tears of the great toe metatarsophalangeal joint (MTPJ) are a rare occurrence. There is minimal literature existing regarding both operative and non-operative management of this pathology, also known as 'traumatic bunion' due to its low incidence. The closest analog is a traumatic ulnar collateral ligament (UCL) rupture in the hand (Skier's thumb). Suture anchor repair with an internal brace has proven to be an effective treatment for thumb UCL tears with rapid rehabilitation and early range of motion. This method has not yet been reported in literature for a weightbearing joint such as the hallux MTPJ. We present a case report for a professional surfer with traumatic great toe MCL avulsion with surgical technique allowing rapid return to sport. Methods: We present a case report of a novel technique for this rare traumatic MCL avulsion. Surgical management of the great toe MCL was performed utilizing a pre-loaded interference screw to fixate suture at the MCL origin with suture tape augmentation. A mid-axial medial approach was used with L-shaped capsular flap to expose the MCL. 3-0 braided suture was passed through the proximal avulsed MCL. A drill tunnel was prepared at the MCL origin, and the MCL was repaired to its anatomic origin with an interference screw technique for knotless technique. The interference screw was preloaded with suture tape. The suture tape from the interference screw was passed extra articular and the capsule was repaired. The sutuer tape was then inserted into the MCL insertion on the distal phalanx using a small interference screw and drill tunnel for a suture tape augmentation while the toe was held in neutral MTPJ position. Results: He was made weightbearing as tolerated in a CAM boot post-operatively. Immediate active great toe MTPJ motion was permitted. At 2 weeks post-op, sutures were removed, and he was allowed self-directed passive range of motion of the toe, with continued weightbearing as tolerated in the boot. All restrictions were lifted at 4 weeks for a return to play protocol and the patient resumed surfing immediately at that time. His last follow up appointment was at 3 months post-op, at which time he had resumed full activity, had no deformity recurrence, no pain, and his range of motion was symmetric to the contralateral foot. The patient was able to compete at full activity in a national tournament to continue the professional tour at 3 months post- operatively. Conclusion: This report demonstrates a novel surgical technique for the treatment of a rare traumatic MCL avulsion of the great toe (the 'traumatic bunion'). In this case of great toe MCL repair in a professional surfer, we utilized a knotless technique to repair the MCL to it's anatomic origin and also provide suture tape augmentation to allow rapid rehabilitation. This report demonstrates rapid return to sport, an excellent outcome, easy rehabilitation, and straightforward surgical technique. More research will be needed to demonstrate the success of this technique in a broader population.

Poster 171: No Difference in Clinical Outcomes for Arthroscopic Suprapectoral versus Open Subpectoral Bicep Tenodesis: A Randomized Prospective Analysis

Objectives:Our group has previously reported the 1-year outcomes arthroscopic suprapectoral biceps tenodesis (ASPBT) versus open subpectoral biceps for the management of long head of the biceps tendon (LHBT) pathology. While patients had similar 1-year biceps strength and pain, any ongoing changes in functional outcomes is yet unknown. We aimed to directly compare clinical outcomes of ASPBT versus OSPBT with interference screw fixation, distal to the bony bicipital groove, at 2 years follow-up.Methods:Eighty-seven patients undergoing biceps tenodesis for LHBT disease were randomized into the ASPBT group or OSPBT group. Both techniques utilized polyether ether ketone (PEEK) inference screws for tenodesis fixation. Patients completed American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeon (ASES), Constant subjective, and Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (SANE) questionnaires preoperatively, and again at 6 months, 12 months and final follow-up at minimum 24 months.Results:Seven-five patients (37/46 randomized to ASPBT [80%], 38/41 randomized to OSPBT [93%]) with a mean age of 50.3 ± 10.4 years and a mean body mass index of 28.9 ± 6.3 were included in clinical outcome analyses. Mean final follow-up was 35.1 months (ASPBT: 35.4 months, OSPBT: 34.9 months, range 24-63 months). Comparison of demographic characteristics and intraoperative findings showed no significant difference in age, gender, concomitant procedures, and rotator cuff disease. No statistically significant differences in ASES (P =.26), Constant subjective scores (P = .60), and SANE scores (P = .74) were found at final follow-up. Clinical outcomes scores showed no significant improvement from 12.6 months to final follow-up at 35.1 months (ASPBT: ASES, P=0.42; Constant, P=0.23; SANE, P=0.43 v. OSPBT: ASES, P=0.76; Constant, P=0.57; SANE, P=0.64). The mean SANE score in the ASPBT group had a statistically nonsignificant, 6.1-point increase from 1 to 3 years post-operatively (p = .23), which was greater than the minimal clinically importance difference (MCID). No patients required revision of biceps tenodesis in either group.Conclusions:No significant differences in patient-reported outcomes and complication rates were found at any time point between subjects undergoing ASPBT or OSPBT, utilizing the same interference screw technique, for the management of LHBT pathology.Table 1Patient Demographic and Other CharacteristicsTable 2Intraoperative FindingsTable 3Patient Reported Outcome measuresTable 4Patient Reported Outcome Measures Difference from 12 Months to Final Follow-Up

Poster 158: Does an In-Situ Biceps Tenodesis with an Anatomic Length-Tension Relationship affect the Incidence of Popeye Deformity and Clinical Outcomes Compared to an Estimated Length-Tension Relationship Technique?

Objectives:Biceps Popeye deformity is a common finding with rupture of the long head of the biceps tendon (LHBT), biceps tenodesis failure or length-tension mismatch during tenodesis. The Popeye muscle is a cosmetic deformity of the arm that may be accompanied by cramping and muscle fatigue and many patients are dissatisfied with the symptoms and appearance. Although prior studies have described physiologic landmarks to optimize the length-tension relationship during biceps tenodesis after LHBT rupture, no study has assessed the biceps muscle appearance after tenodesis “in-situ” prior to the release of the LHBT from the superior labrum for biceps tendon pathologies without complete rupture. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to assess clinical outcomes of an all-arthroscopic technique for biceps tenodesis which maintains the anatomic length-tension relationship of the LHBT prior to tenotomy from the superior labrum. We compared this group of patients to a control group of patients who underwent an interference screw tenodesis technique that required cutting the LHBT from the superior glenoid prior to tenodesis with an estimation of the anatomic length-tendon relationship potentially contributing to subtle biceps Popeye deformity. We hypothesize that an “in-situ” anatomic length-tension relationship tenodesis technique would reduce the risk of a Popeye deformity, reduce cramping and muscle fatigue, and have improved patient-reported outcome measures compared to an estimated length-tension relationship tenodesis with an interference screw.Methods:Consecutive patients who underwent arthroscopic biceps tenodesis with concomitant rotator cuff procedures were enrolled in this study from 2019-2021 and patients were grouped based on a change in senior author’s tenodesis technique, with the initial cohort having an arthroscopic interference screw subpectoral biceps tenodesis after tenotomy from the superior labrum in an “estimated” length-tension relationship technique (Group 1), and the later cohort having an arthroscopic suprapectoral biceps tenodesis “in-situ” with an anatomic length-tension relationship (Group 2) with the LHBT tied to the side of the humerus with all-suture unicortical anchors. Patients were assessed at a minimum of 3-month follow-up and asked about post-operative anterior arm pain and biceps muscle spasms, and if they notice any difference in appearance between their bicep muscles on a 4-point Likert scale (none, mild, moderate, severe). Patient-Reported Outcomes (PROs) of Veterans-Rand 12, American Shoulder and Elbow Score (ASES), EuroQol- 5 Dimension (EQ-5D), PROMIS 10, and Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (SANE) were collected. Bilateral bicep images of participants were taken in three forearm positions with the elbow flexed 90 degrees: (1) maximal supination, (2) neutral, and (3) maximal pronation. Review of pronation, supination, and neutral forearm rotation bilateral biceps images were evaluated, after blinding and de-identification, by two shoulder and elbow fellowship-trained board-certified orthopedic surgeons for visual appearance and grade of Popeye deformity (none, mild, obvious Popeye). Non-parametric between-group comparison and analysis were performed with statistical significance set at p < 0.05.Results:Sixty-two patients (53% female, age 58.7 ± 9.0 years) were enrolled (33 in Group 1 and 29 in Group 2) with a mean follow-up of 9.8 ± 6.5 months. There were no significant differences between groups with respect to gender, age, and laterality of biceps tenodesis, as well as type and size of rotator cuff repair. There were no significant differences in ASES, EQ5D, and SANE scores between the two technique groups. However, PROMIS 10 Physical Health Scores were significantly improved in Group 2 (15.7 ± 2.3) compared to Group 1 (14.4 ± 2.9) (p=0.03). Patients in Group 2 experienced significantly less pain in their anterior arm than patients in Group 1 (19% vs. 33%, p=0.02) however there were no differences in biceps muscle spasm (3.4% vs. 5.2%, p=0.21). There also were no significant differences in patient-perceived biceps deformity between Group 1 (17.2%) and Group 2 (27%) (p=0.26). Similarly, there were no significant differences in surgeon-perceived biceps deformity between Group 1 and Group 2 (30.3% vs. 24.1%, p=0.47). Interrater reliability for surgeon assessment of a Popeye deformity was found to have a substantial agreement with a Kappa value of 0.77 (p <.0.001), 95% CI (0.645, 0.855).Conclusions:An arthroscopic suprapectoral biceps tenodesis performed “in-situ” with an anatomic length-tension relationship did not reduce the incidence of patient or surgeon perceived Popeye muscle deformity compared to an interference screw tenodesis performed after tenotomy in an “estimated” length-tension relationship technique. Interestingly, the “in-situ” length-tension technique reduced anterior arm pain and improved PROMIS 10 physical health scores post-operatively compared to the “estimated” interference screw technique.

Paper 66: Radiostereometric Analysis of Biceps Tenodesis: A Prospective Comparison of All-Suture Anchor vs. Interference Screw, Arthroscopic and Mini-Open Techniques

Objectives:Recent studies suggest that similar results can be achieved via arthroscopic and open biceps tenodesis techniques. The purpose of this investigation was to quantify and compare the behavior of the biceps tenodesis construct in arthroscopic suprapectoral (ASPBT) and open subpectoral (OSPBT) techniques performed with either interference screw or suture anchor fixation, with radiostereometric analysis (RSA).Methods:A prospective cohort study was performed comparing migration of the biceps tendon after suprapectoral and subpectoral biceps tenodesis (BT) with Polyetheretherketone (PEEK) interference screw vs. all-suture suture anchor (ASSA) fixation. Patients with symptomatic biceps tendinopathy, anterior intertubercular groove tenderness, and positive biceps tension tests were included in the investigation. A tantalum bead, functioning as a radiostereometric marker, was sutured to the biceps tendon before final fixation of tendon tissue with either an interference screw or suture anchor. Following final fixation, AP radiographs were obtained intraoperatively. Follow up single view AP radiographs were obtained at one week and 3-months post-operatively. The distance from the center of the tantalum bead to the most proximal aspect of the humeral head was measured.Results:Of 128 patients enrolled, 120 (93.8%) were available for follow-up. The average age was 52.05±10.5 years, average BMI 30.8±5.4, and 29% of the patients were females. Groups were similar concerning patient demographics and concomitant procedures. At final follow up, there was no difference in distal migration between the OSPBT and ASPBT performed with an interference screw (4.31 vs. 4.02 mm, respectively, P=0.418). BT performed with a single ASSA demonstrated significantly more migration than BT performed with double ASSA (27.24 vs. 9.73 mm, respectively, P=0.005) and significantly more migration than the interference screw (27.24 26 vs. 4.31 mm, respectively, P<0.001). BT performed with the double ASSA technique demonstrated significantly more migration than the interference screw (9.73 vs. 4.02 mm, respectively, P=0.041). Three patients (11.1%) in the open single ASSA group, one patient in the arthroscopic double ASSA group (4.0%) suffered Popeye deformities. None of the patients in the interference screw cohorts experienced Popeye deformities.Conclusions:OSPBT and ASPBT demonstrate similar construct stability with use of interference screws as assessed by RSA. BT performed with single ASSA fixation resulted in more distal migration compared to double ASSA and interference screw fixation. Interference screw fixation provided more construct stability compared to a single and double ASSA, whether performed arthroscopically or with an open approach. These findings are the first in vivo results to characterize and quantify the biceps tenodesis construct in the post-operative period.Table 1.Patient Demographics and Other Characteristics.Table 2.Intraoperative Findings.Table 3.Tantalum bead migration at 1 week, 3 months and between 1 week and 3 months for arthroscopic and open techniques.Figure 1.Comparison of postoperative construct migration for the four studied techniques of biceps tenodesis measured by radiostereometric analysis.

No Difference in Clinical Outcomes for Arthroscopic Suprapectoral Versus Open Subpectoral Biceps Tenodesis at Midterm Follow-up: A Randomized Prospective Analysis

Background: We have previously reported the 1-year outcomes of arthroscopic suprapectoral biceps tenodesis (ASPBT) versus open subpectoral biceps tenodesis (OSPBT) for the management of long head of the biceps tendon (LHBT) pathology. While patients had similar 1-year biceps muscle strength and pain, longer-term functional outcomes are unknown. Purpose: To directly compare clinical outcomes of ASPBT versus OSPBT with interference screw fixation, distal to the bony bicipital groove, at a minimum of 2 years’ follow-up. Study Design: Randomized controlled trial; Level of evidence, 1. Methods: A total of 85 patients undergoing biceps tenodesis (BT) for LHBT disease were randomized into the ASPBT or OSPBT group. Both techniques utilized polyether ether ketone inference screws for tenodesis fixation. Patients completed American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES), Constant subjective, and Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (SANE) questionnaires preoperatively and again at 6 months, 12 months, and at the final follow-up at a minimum of 24 months. Results: A total of 73 patients (37/42 randomized to ASPBT [88%]; 36/42 randomized to OSPBT [86%]) with a mean age of 50.4 ± 10.3 years and a mean body mass index of 29 ± 7.9 were included in clinical outcome analyses. The mean final follow-up was 2.9 years (ASPBT, 3 years; OSPBT, 2.8 years [range 2-5.2 years]). Comparison of demographic characteristics and intraoperative findings showed no significant differences in age, sex, concomitant procedures, and rotator cuff disease. No statistically significant differences in the ASES (P = .25), Constant subjective (P = .52), and SANE scores (P = .61) were found at the final follow-up. Clinical outcomes scores showed no significant improvement from a mean of 12.6 months to the final follow-up at 34.5 months (ASPBT: ASES, P = .43; Constant, P = .25; SANE, P = .45 vs OSPBT: ASES, P = .65; Constant, P = .78; SANE, P = .70). No patients required revision of BT in either group. Conclusion: This study reported a minimum of 2-year follow-up of patients undergoing ASPBT or OSPBT, utilizing the same interference screw technique, for the management of LHBT pathology in the setting of concomitant shoulder procedures. There were no significant differences in patient-reported outcomes and complication rates found at any time point. Registration: NCT02192073 (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier).

Re-rupture rate and the post-surgical meniscal injury after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with the Press-Fit-Hybrid®-technique in comparison to the interference screw technique: a retrospective analysis of 200 patients with at least 3 years follow-up

BackgroundThere is currently no consensus regarding the preferred surgical procedure for the reconstruction of anterior cruciate ligament (ACL). The interference screw technique is widely used, but has been associated with a risk of graft damage. The Press-Fit-Hybrid®-technique is one of the alternatives for biological ACL-reconstruction with minimal implant requirements. The hypothesis of this retrospective analysis is, that the Press-Fit-Hybrid®-technique leads to better results with respect to re-rupture rate and secondary meniscal lesion than the interference-screw-technique.MethodsTo compare the re-rupture rate of the interference-screw-technique (IF) used until 2015 with the currently used Press-Fit-Hybrid®-technique (PFH), the last 100 patients of the IF-group and the first 100 patients of the PFH-group were retrospectively analyzed. Primary outcomes were re-rupture rate, complications and secondary meniscal injury. Additionally, laxity, Lachman and Pivot-shift and range of motion were evaluated.ResultsA mean follow-up of 4.2 and 5.3 years revealed 4% and 9% re-rupture rates and 1% and 2% complication rates in the PFH- and IF-group, respectively. In the PFH-group there were no re-ruptures in patients older than 23 years. Secondary meniscal injury post-surgery was 6% and 9% for the PFH and IF-group, respectively. Knee stability was similar in both groups. Range of motion was significantly better in the PFH-group, with 136° of flexion, 6 months after surgery.ConclusionFor ACL-reconstruction the Press-Fit-Hybrid®-technique is an alternative new method. Low level of secondary meniscal lesions after surgery and high stability, is known to prevent later arthrosis of the knee. The encouraging observed trend of the reduction of the re-rupture rate in revision surgery and in young patients using the Press-Fit-Hybrid®-technique in comparison to the interference-screw-technique must be confirmed with further studies.Level of evidenceTherapeutic Level III, retrospective cohort study.

Anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injuries: A review on the newest reconstruction techniques.

The anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) is considered very important for normal knee function, the disruption of which may result in malfunction, meniscal lesions, and the early onset of joint degeneration. The aim of this comprehensive review was to investigate the different techniques used in the reconstruction of damaged ACL. Current methods in reconstruction of ACL include different types of autograft and allograft to replace native ligaments. The ideal graft for reconstruction of ACL is one which is biomechanically similar to the native ligament, is easily harvested, has least harvest site morbidity, and gets well incorporated with the bone. Cross-fixing of hamstrings has been created for ACL reconstruction in the hopes of improving potential problems related to the interference screw and button fixation technique. Previous clinical results indicated that double-bundle ACL reconstruction is equivalent or even superior to single-bundle ACL reconstruction in regaining anterior and rotational stability.

Comparison of mechanical properties in interference screw fixation technique and organic anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction method: a biomechanical study

BackgroundBone and Site Hold Tendon Inside (BASHTI) technique is an organic implant-less technique for anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction with some clinical advantages, such as speeding up the healing process, over implantable techniques. The study aims to compare the mechanical properties of BASHTI technique with the conventional interference screw technique.MethodsTo investigate the mechanical properties, 20 in-vitro experimental tests were conducted. Synthetic dummy bone, along with fresh digital bovine tendons, as a graft, were used for experiments. Three loading steps were applied to all specimens, including a preconditioning, a main cyclic, and a pull-out loading.ResultsThe mechanical characters of an interference screw technique using an 8 mm tendon diameter, including fixation strength, average cyclic stiffness (ACS), and average pull-out stiffness (APS) were found to be 439 ± 132 N, 10.3 ± 5.3 kN/mm, and 109 ± 40 N/mm, respectively. In the case of an interference screw using a 9 mm tendon, the fixation strength, ACS, and APS were obtained 549 ± 87 N, 10.3 ± 4.7 kN/mm, and 91 ± 13 N/mm, respectively. In parallel, the fixation strength, APS, and ACS of BASHTI technique using an 8 mm tendon were 360 ± 123 N, 3.3 ± 0.6 kN/mm, and 79 ± 27 N/mm, respectively, while, for 9 mm tendon 278 ± 103 N, 2.4 ± 1.2 kN/mm, and 111 ± 40 N/mm, were reported for fixation strength, APS, and ACS respectively when BASHTI technique was used.ConclusionAbout 50% of interference screw samples showed superior mechanical properties compared to BASHTI technique, but in another half of the samples, the differences were not significant (N.S.). However, due to organic advantages of BASHTI technique and lower cost, it could be used as a substitute for interference screw technique, especially where fast recovery is expected.

Biomechanical Analysis of Single Interference Screw vs Interference Screw With Cortical Button for Flexor Hallucis Longus Transfer.

Background:Flexor hallucis longus tendon transfer (FHL) with a cortical button tension slide is an innovative addition that has not been measured against traditional methods.Methods:12 pairs (n=24) of fresh-frozen cadaveric tibia-to-toe samples were used and randomized to receive one of the operative FHL techniques. Specimens underwent bone density analysis. Biomechanical loading was applied between 20 and 60 N at 1 Hz for 100 cycles. Post–cyclic load to failure occurred at 1.25 mm/s. Cyclic displacement, structural stiffness, and ultimate load were derived from load-displacement curves. Student t tests evaluated significant effects between both FHL techniques. Linear regression analysis assessed interactions between bone density and strength of FHL technique.Results:Average tendon diameter was 5.44±0.46 mm. Average bone density was 1.06±0.08 g/cm2. Addition of a cortical button to FHL transfer did not significantly affect cyclic displacement (0.78±0.52 mm vs 0.87±0.80 mm) or structural stiffness (162.11±43.34 N/mm vs 167.57±49.19 N/mm). Cortical button addition to FHL transfer resulted in significantly increased ultimate load (343.72±68.93 N) compared with interference screw alone (255.62±77.17 N) (P = .0002). Linear regression analyses did not reveal any significant interactions between bone density and FHL tendon transfer technique.Conclusion:Enhanced strength can be achieved with FHL tendon transfer to calcaneus using an interference screw and cortical button tension slide technique as compared to an interference screw alone. Cortical buttons in the setting of FHL tendon transfer to the calcaneus offers an additional level of support.Clinical Relevance:Operative cases presenting with poor bone quality due to osteoporosis or osteopenia could benefit from cortical button fixation during FHL transfer. Clinical studies are needed to determine if the increased construct stability conferred from the additional use of a flip button results in fewer FHL transfer failures or better clinical outcomes.Level of Evidence:Level V, Controlled Laboratory Study.

Thumb carpometacarpal arthroplasty and trapeziectomy using a tenodesis screw compared to ligament reconstruction

This study aimed to compare the results of patients treated with a thumb carpometacarpal (CMC) suspension arthroplasty using an interference screw technique with patients that were treated by trapeziectomy and ligament reconstruction. A retrospective chart review was conducted of patients over 18 years old who required surgical treatment for thumb CMC joint arthritis treated by a single surgeon. Patients included in the study followed the same preoperative and postoperative protocol. Information related to functional outcomes was collected (pinch and grip strength, pain, Kapandji score, proximal migration of first metacarpal bone). One hundred and five patients were included, 77% were female, age at the time of the study was 62.7 years old; 74 (70%) patients were treated with the tenodesis screw (TS) technique and 31 (30%) with trapeziectomy and ligament reconstruction (TZLR). Patients were followed for a mean of 8.4 months. Postoperative pain was 1.2 in the TS group and 0.6 in the TZLR group; Kapandji score was 8.3 in the TS group and 9 in the TZLR group; in the TS group, the grip strength was 26.2kg and key pinch strength was 6.15kg; in the TZLR group, grip strength was 12.8kg and key pinch strength was 4.7kg. Proximal migration was 0.4cm in the TZLR group and 0.6cm in the TS group. The use of tenodesis screw and half of the flexor carpi radialis had minor advantages, such as increasing the grip and key pinch strength without differences relative the non-operated thumb, minimal migration of the first metacarpal bone compared with the other technique.

Patient Reported Outcomes of Long Head Biceps Tenodesis after Spontaneous Rupture.

The aim of this study was to evaluate the factors influencing patient reported outcome measures (PROM) of biceps tenodesis after the rupture of proximal long head of the biceps tendon. Retrospective chart review was conducted to identify patients with complete proximal rupture of the long head of the biceps that underwent biceps tenodesis between 2002-2017. This yielded 42 patients, of which 23 (55%) completed the PROMIS Pain Interference, PROMIS Upper Extremity, Quick DASH, and a custom biceps tear questionnaire, at a median of 8.5 years (IQR:5.2-12) post-operatively. The median age of the respondents was 57 years (IQR: 43-61). The majority of patients (n=12, 52%) underwent tenodesis using suture anchor fixation, while the remaining underwent tenodesis with interference screw technique (n=6, 26%), key hole technique (n=1, 4.3%), or tunnel technique (n=1, 4.3%). A bivariate analysis was performed to evaluate factors influencing the PROMs. Six patients (27%) reported persistent biceps cramping at a median of 8.2 years post-operatively, negatively impacting PROMs, and this was associated with older age. Six patients (27%) had post-operative complications, including infection, pain, stiffness, and re-rupture, of which four patients (17%) underwent reoperation. Patients with activity/sports-induced injury or those that underwent tenodesis using a suture anchor technique demonstrated better PROMs. Post-operative biceps cramping persists in almost one-third of patients and significantly impacts PROMs. Patient activity level and the use of suture anchor technique for tenodesis were independent predictors of improved biceps tenodesis outcome scores.

Medial Collateral Ligament Reconstruction With Dual Adjustable-Loop Suspensory Fixation: A Technique Guide

The purpose of this technique paper is to outline a minimally invasive technique using dual suspensory fixation with adjustable-loop devices for reconstruction of the superficial medial collateral ligament. The femoral fixation is performed through a limited approach at the anatomic origin of the medial collateral ligament, a socket is prepared, and the graft is docked using the adjustable-loop suspensory fixation. The tibial socket is prepared through a separate incision just distal to the pes anserine tendons and drilled medially to laterally perpendicular to the tibial shaft. The graft is tunneled and docked into the tibial tunnel using adjustable-loop cortical suspensory fixation on the far cortex. The knee is cycled through a full arc of motion and stressed in valgus to take initial creep out of the construct. The knee is placed in 30° of flexion and slight varus and final tension is applied to both the femoral and tibial side. With this technique, fixation can be completed with a minimally invasive incision and it allows the ability to tension the graft both on the femoral and tibial side to the desired level, providing a significant advantage over previously used interference screw techniques.

The Relevant Anatomy of the Biceps Tendon When Performing Tenodesis in Filipino Cadaveric Specimens

Background: Biceps tenodesis is a technique frequently performed in shoulder surgeries. Various techniques have been described, but there is no consensus on which technique restores the length-tension relationship. Restoration of the physiologic length-tension relationship has been correlated to better functional outcomes, such as decreased incidence of residual pain or weakness of the biceps. The objective of this study was to measure the anatomic relationship of the origin of the biceps tendon with its zones in the upper extremity. This would provide an anatomic guide or an acceptable placement of the tenodesis to reestablish good biceps tension during surgery. Methods: The study used nine adult cadavers (five males, four females) from the [withheld for blinded review]. Nine shoulder specimens were dissected and markers were placed at five points along each biceps tendon: (1) Labral origin (LO) (2) Superior bicipital groove (SBG) (3) Superior border of the pectoralis tendon (SBPMT) (4) Musculotendinous junction (MTJ) and (5) Inferior border of the pectoralis tendon (IBPMT). Using the origin of the tendon as the initial point of reference, measurements were made to the four subsequent sites. The humeral length was recorded by measuring the distance between the greater tuberosity and the lateral epicondyle as well as the tendon diameter at the articular surface. Results: The intraclass correlation coefficient was excellent across all measures. A total of nine cadavers were included. Mean age of patients was 66.33 years old, ranging from 52-82 years old. These were composed of five male and four female cadavers. The mean tendon length was 24.83mm ± 4.32 from the origin to the superior border of the bicipital groove, 73.50mm ± 6.96 to the Superior Border Pectoralis Major Tendon, 100.89mm ± 6.88 to the Musculotendinous Junction, and 111.11mm ± 7.45 to the Inferior Border Pectoralis Major Tendon. The mean tendon diameter at the articular origin was 6.44mm ± 1.76. Conclusion: This study provided measurement guidelines that could restore the natural length-tension relationship during biceps tenodesis using the interference screw technique in Filipinos. A simple method of restoring a normal length-tension relationship is by doing tenodesis close to the articular origin and creating a bone socket of approximately 25mm in depth, using the superior border of the bicipital groove as a landmark.

A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Biceps Tenodesis Fixation Strengths: Fixation Type and Location Are Biomechanically Equivalent

The purpose of this meta-analysis and systematic review was to critically evaluate the biomechanical outcomes of different fixation constructs for a variety of biceps tenodesis techniques in cadaveric models based on both type of fixation and location. A PROSPERO-registered systematic review (CCRD42018109243) of the current literature was conducted with the terms "long head of biceps" AND "tenodesis" AND "biomechanics" and numerous variations thereof in the PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases, yielding 1,460 abstracts. After screening by eligibility criteria, 18 full-text articles were included. The individual biomechanical factors evaluated included ultimate load to failure (in newtons), stiffness (in newtons per millimeter), and cyclic displacement (in millimeters). After reviewing the included literature, we performed a quality analysis of the studies (Quality Appraisal for Cadaveric Studies scale score) and a meta-analysis comparing raw mean differences in data between the suprapectoral and subpectoral fixation location groups, as well as between the fixation construct groups. Among the 18 included studies, 347 cadaveric specimens were evaluated for ultimate load to failure, stiffness, and cyclic displacement when comparing both location (suprapectoral vs subpectoral) and tenodesis fixation type (interference screw vs cortical button, suture anchor, or all-soft-tissue techniques). Interference screw fixation showed significantly greater mean stiffness by 8.0 N/mm (P= .013) compared with the other grouped techniques but did not show significant differences when evaluated for ultimate load to failure and cyclic displacement (P= .28 and P= .18, respectively). Additionally, no difference in construct strength was seen when comparing the fixation strength of suprapectoral versus subpectoral techniques for stiffness, ultimate load to failure, and cyclic loading (P= .47, P= .053, and P= .13, respectively). In this meta-analysis, no significant biomechanical differences were found when the results were stratified by specific surgical technique (interference screw vs other tenodesis techniques) and location (suprapectoral vs subpectoral biceps tenodesis). As a result of this study, when biomechanically evaluating specific tenodesis constructs, the individual clinician has the liberty of choosing the fixation technique based on his or her preference and knowledge of shortcomings of each type of fixation construct.

Biceps Tenodesis Is a Viable Option for Management of Proximal Biceps Injuries in Patients Less Than 25 Years of Age

To evaluate outcomes after biceps tenodesis performed in patients younger than 25years, to evaluate reoperations and complications in this population, and to critically appraise return to preinjury level of play for this population. Forty-five consecutive patients younger than 25years underwent subpectoral biceps tenodesis for biceps tendinopathy or biceps-labral complex injuries including SLAP tears. Biceps tenodesis was performed using an interference screw technique. Patients with a minimum 2-year follow-up were analyzed. Functional outcomes were assessed with the visual analog scale score, American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) score, ASES functional score, Simple Shoulder Test score, and range of motion. Activity level and return to sport were followed postoperatively. Of the 45 patients younger than 25years who underwent biceps tenodesis, 36 (80%) were available for follow-up at a minimum of 2years, with a mean age of 19.8years and mean follow-up period of 38.6months. Of these 36 patients, 34 (94%) were athletes, with 20 patients playing at collegiate level. All clinical outcome scores improved, with the ASES score improving from 54.7 to 81.7, the ASES functional score improving from 17.5 to 25.1, and the Simple Shoulder Test score improving from 7.4 to 10.1 (P < .001). At the time of follow-up, 4 patients (11%) had undergone revision surgery for other injuries. Of the 34 athletes, 25 (73%) returned to sports, with 19 returning at the same level and 6 returning at a lower level of play; 77% of overhead athletes returned to sports. When indicated, biceps tenodesis offers an alternative to SLAP repair in young patients. Biceps tenodesis in patients younger than 25years yields satisfactory outcomes, with two-thirds of patients returning to sport and a low revision rate. Level IV, therapeutic case series.

A BIOMECHANICAL COMPARISON OF SUTURE ANCHOR VS. INTERFERENCE SCREW TECHNIQUE FOR PATELLAR FIXATION FOR MEDIAL PATELLOFEMORAL LIGAMENT RECONSTRUCTION

Background: There are numerous techniques for MPFL reconstruction, however, one single technique has not been proven to be superior to another. Suture anchor reconstruction has been shown to provide stable fixation while decreasing the risk of patellar fracture. The aim of the study was to compare the stiffness and clinical load to failure of two common MPFL reconstruction techniques. Our hypothesis was that there would be no significant difference in the stiffness and the clinical load to failure between the suture anchor and interference screw reconstructions. Methods: Eight pairs of fresh frozen cadaveric knees were randomized into two groups undergoing MPFL reconstruction using either a suture anchor technique (n=8) or an interference screw technique (n=8). Testing was performed at 0, 30, 60, and 90 degrees of flexion for the native knee, transected medial structures, and reconstructed MPFL. Next, the reconstructed MPFL specimens were tested until failure in 0 degrees of flexion. T test, One-Way ANOVA, and repeated measures of ANOVA were used for statistical analysis, P values less than 0.05 were considered significant. Results: The average stiffness for the suture anchor and interference screw reconstructions was 12.02 ± 3.96 N/mm and 14.21 ± 4.20 N/mm, respectively (t test, p = 0.27), while average clinical load to failure was 256.57 ± 54.1 N and 237.81 ± 23.82 N, respectively (t test, p = 0.38). There was no significant difference in stiffness between the suture anchor and interference screw techniques at 0, 30, and 60 degrees of flexion. Conclusions: The suture anchor and interference screw reconstruction techniques produce comparable stiffness for sub-failure testing at 0 and 30 degrees of flexion. For testing to failure, the initial stiffness for both reconstruction techniques have been shown to be concordant with previously published values for the native MPFL. Both reconstruction techniques provide greater ultimate failure loads than those reported for the native MPFL in previous studies. Clinical Relevance: Suture anchor reconstruction described in our study provides another reliable option for the reconstruction of the medial patellofemoral ligament. [Figure: see text]

Comparison of suture anchor vs. interference screw technique for patellar fixation for medial patellofemoral ligament reconstruction

Summary Background There are numerous techniques for MPFL reconstruction, however, one single technique has not been proven to be superior to another. Suture anchor reconstruction has been shown to provide stable fixation while decreasing the risk of patellar fracture. Purpose The aim of the study was to compare the stiffness and clinical load to failure of two common MPFL reconstruction techniques. Our hypothesis was that there would be no significant difference in the stiffness and the clinical load to failure between the suture anchor and interference screw reconstructions. Methods Eight pairs of fresh frozen cadaveric knees were randomized into two groups undergoing MPFL reconstruction using either a suture anchor technique (n = 8) or an interference screw technique (n = 8). Testing was performed at 0, 30, 60, and 90 degrees of flexion for the native knee, transected medial structures, and reconstructed MPFL. Next, the reconstructed MPFL specimens were tested until failure in 0 degrees of flexion. t-Test, One-Way ANOVA, and repeated measures of ANOVA were used for statistical analysis, p values less than 0.05 were considered significant. Results The average stiffness for the suture anchor and interference screw reconstructions was 12.02 ± 3.96 N/mm and 14.21 ± 4.20 N/mm, respectively (t-test, p = 0.27), while average clinical load to failure was 256.57 ± 54.1 N and 237.81 ± 23.82 N, respectively (t-test, p = 0.38). There was no significant difference in stiffness between the suture anchor and interference screw techniques at 0, 30, and 60 degrees of flexion. Conclusions The suture anchor and interference screw reconstruction techniques produce comparable stiffness for sub-failure testing at 0 and 30 degrees of flexion. For testing to failure, the initial stiffness for both reconstruction techniques have been shown to be concordant with previously published values for the native MPFL. Both reconstruction techniques provide greater ultimate failure loads than those reported for the native MPFL in previous studies. Suture anchor reconstruction described in our study provides another reliable option for the reconstruction of the medial patellofemoral ligament. Clinical relevance Our study provides biomechanical data that the suture anchor technique described in this study provides comparable fixation compared to interference screw fixation and has the potential of reducing fracture to patella particularly in the pediatric population with small patellae.

Biomechanical Evaluation of a Transtendinous All-Suture Anchor Technique Versus Interference Screw Technique for Suprapectoral Biceps Tenodesis in a Cadaveric Model

To compare the biomechanical properties of an transtendinous all-suture anchor technique with the commonly-accepted interference screw technique in a cadaveric model. Sixteen fresh-frozen human cadaveric shoulders (mean age, 67.6 ± 5.8years) were used and were randomly divided into 2 experimental long head of the biceps brachii (LHB) tenodesis groups (n= 8), namely transtendinous all-suture anchor technique and interference screw technique. The location of tenodesis was in the bicipital groove, 1cm distal to the proximal border of the bicipital groove. Tensile force parallel to the longitudinal axis of the humerus was applied to each specimen. A preload of 5N was applied for 2minutes, followed by cyclic loading for 500 cycles from 5 to 70N at 1Hz; then, a load-to-failure test at 1mm/s was performed. The ultimate failure load, stiffness, cyclic displacement, failure displacement, and failure modes were recorded. The transtendinous all-suture anchor technique provided similar ultimate failure load and stiffness as the interference screw technique. However, the cyclic and failure displacements of the transtendinous all-suture anchor technique were significantly greater than the interference screw technique (P= .009 and .021, respectively). Six specimens in the transtendinous all-suture anchor group failed because of suture anchor pullout, while failure of the other 2was caused by tendon tear; by contrast, all specimens in the interference screw group failed because of tendon tear. The transtendinous all-suture anchor technique for LHB tenodesis offered equivalent ultimate failure load and stiffness but had significantly larger cyclic and failure displacement values when compared with the interference screw technique in this cadaveric biomechanical study. The transtendinous all-suture anchor technique is an alternative technique for suprapectoral LHB tenodesis; however, care should be taken because only time zero biomechanical data are available.