A biomechanical comparison of two arthroscopic suture techniques in biceps tenodesis: whip-stitch vs. simple suture techniques

A biomechanical study to optimize superior capsular reconstruction operative technique

Background

The goals of this study were to optimize superior capsular reconstruction by assessing the relative fixation strength of 4 suture anchors; evaluating 3 glenoid neck locations for fixation strength and bone mineral density (BMD); determining if there is a correlation between BMD and fixation strength; and determining which portal sites have optimal access to the posterosuperior and anterosuperior glenoid neck for anchor placement.

Methods

Twenty cadaveric specimens were randomized into 4 groups: all-suture anchor (FiberTak), conventional 3.0-mm knotless suture anchor (SutureTak), 3.9-mm knotless PEEK (polyetheretherketone) Corkscrew anchor, and 4.5-mm Bio-Corkscrew anchor. Each specimen was prepared with 3 anchors into the glenoid: an anterosuperior anchor, superior anchor, and posterosuperior anchor. All anchors were inserted into the superior glenoid neck 5 mm from the glenoid rim. A materials testing system performed cyclic testing (250 cycles) followed by load-to-failure testing at 12.5 mm/s. Cyclic elongation, first cycle excursion, maximum load, and stiffness were recorded. Using custom software, BMD was calculated at each anchor location. This software was also used to assess access to the posterosuperior and anterosuperior glenoid neck from standard arthroscopic portal positions.

Results

There was no significant difference in cyclic elongation (P = .546), first cycle excursion (P = .476), maximum load (P = .817), or stiffness (P = .309) among glenoid anchor positions. Cyclic elongation was significantly longer in the PEEK Corkscrew group relative to the other implants (P ≤ .002). First cycle excursion was significantly greater in the FiberTak group relative to all other implants (P ≤ .008). For load-to-failure testing, the Bio-Corkscrew group achieved the highest maximum load (P ≤ .001). No other differences in cyclic or failure testing were observed between the groups. No differences in stiffness testing were observed (P = .133). The superior glenoid rim had the greatest BMD (P = .003), but there was no correlation between BMD and cyclic/load outcomes. The posterior portal (80% of specimens) and the anterior portal (60% of specimens) demonstrated the best access to the posterosuperior and anterosuperior glenoid neck, respectively.

Conclusion

The 4.5-mm Bio-Corkscrew anchor provided the most robust fixation to the glenoid during superior capsular reconstruction as it demonstrated the strongest maximum load, had minimal elongation, had minimal first cycle excursion, and did not fail during cyclic testing. The superior glenoid neck had the highest BMD; however, there was no correlation between BMD or glenoid anchor location and biomechanical outcomes. The posterior portal and anterior portal provided optimal access to the posterosuperior glenoid neck and anterosuperior glenoid neck, respectively.

Evaluating clinical outcomes of two biceps tenodesis techniques: Loop 'N' Tack and subpectoral biceps tenodesis

Purpose

Biceps tenodesis is an effective surgical procedure that can address pathologies of the long head of the biceps tendon. The purpose of this study was to evaluate clinical outcomes following two different biceps tenodesis techniques: Loop 'N' Tack biceps tenodesis and subpectoral biceps tenodesis.

Hypothesis

Patients undergoing both the subpectoral biceps tenodesis and Loop 'N' Tack biceps tenodesis will have improvements in patient-reported outcomes.

Methods

Hundred and sixty five consecutive patients who underwent biceps tenodesis were retrospectively identified and contacted by phone to collect visual analog scale pain scores, University of California, Los Angeles shoulder scores, Simple Shoulder Test scores, Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation scores, and American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons scores. Range of motion, elbow flexion strength, and incidence of bicipital groove pain and Popeye deformity were recorded.

Results

One Hundred and forty five patients were included in the study (55 subpectoral, 90 Loop 'N' Tack). Patients in both groups reported high American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons, Simple Shoulder Test, University of California, Los Angeles, Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation shoulder function scores, low visual analog scale pain scores, and had a minimal risk of complications when measured one year postoperatively.

Conclusion

Loop 'N' Tack biceps tenodesis and subpectoral biceps tenodesis techniques are reliable and effective procedures that can reduce pain scores and restore shoulder function when patients require surgical intervention.