Abstract
Background
Recent technical improvements have led the way to a resurgence of the single-incision approach for repair of distal biceps tendon injuries. There has been no biomechanical evaluation of all these techniques with comparison to the standard 2-incision bone tunnel technique.
Hypothesis
There will be no difference under cyclic loading and ultimate failure between the 2-incision bone tunnel technique, suture anchor repair, interference screw, and EndoButton techniques for the repair of distal biceps tendon ruptures.
Study Design
Controlled laboratory study.
Methods
Sixty-three fresh-frozen cadaveric elbows were randomly assigned to 4 treatment groups (bone tunnel, EndoButton, suture anchor, interference screw). Cyclic loading was then performed from 0° to 90° at 0.5 Hz for 3600 cycles with a 50-N load. A differential variable reductance transducer was placed between the radius and distal tendon to determine displacement. The construct was then pulled to failure at 120 mm/min.
Results
A multiple analysis of variance revealed no statistically significant difference for displacement among the 4 repair techniques. Displacement using the bone tunnel was 3.55 mm, EndoButton was 3.42 mm, suture anchor was 2.33 mm, and interference screw was 2.15 mm. There was a statistically significant greater load to failure with EndoButton (440 N) than suture anchor (381 N), bone tunnel (310 N), or interference screw (232 N) (P < .001).
Conclusion
The EndoButton technique had the highest load to failure.
Clinical Relevance
These data demonstrate the EndoButton to be the strongest repair technique, with no failures during cycling at physiologic loads and with the largest load to failure. These findings are important in maximizing surgical results and stability and suggest that the construct can tolerate early postoperative active range of motion.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
