176 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 23725678)
1. Biomechanical comparison of long head of biceps tenodesis with interference screw and biceps sling soft tissue techniques.
Ahmed M; Young BT; Bledsoe G; Cutuk A; Kaar SG
Arthroscopy; 2013 Jul; 29(7):1157-63. PubMed ID: 23725678
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Biomechanical Evaluation of a Transtendinous All-Suture Anchor Technique Versus Interference Screw Technique for Suprapectoral Biceps Tenodesis in a Cadaveric Model.
Hong CK; Hsu KL; Kuan FC; Lin CL; Yeh ML; Su WR
Arthroscopy; 2018 Jun; 34(6):1755-1761. PubMed ID: 29482858
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Biomechanical Analysis of All-Suture Suture Anchor Fixation Compared With Conventional Suture Anchors and Interference Screws for Biceps Tenodesis.
Frank RM; Bernardoni ED; Veera SS; Waterman BR; Griffin JW; Shewman EF; Cole BJ; Romeo AA; Verma NN
Arthroscopy; 2019 Jun; 35(6):1760-1768. PubMed ID: 31072716
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Biomechanical Comparison of All-Suture Anchor Fixation and Interference Screw Technique for Subpectoral Biceps Tenodesis.
Chiang FL; Hong CK; Chang CH; Lin CL; Jou IM; Su WR
Arthroscopy; 2016 Jul; 32(7):1247-52. PubMed ID: 27039966
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Effect of interference screw depth on fixation strength in biceps tenodesis.
Salata MJ; Bailey JR; Bell R; Frank RM; McGill KC; Lin EC; Kercher JS; Wang VM; Provencher MT; Mazzocca AD; Verma NN; Romeo AA
Arthroscopy; 2014 Jan; 30(1):11-5. PubMed ID: 24183106
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Subpectoral Biceps Tenodesis With PEEK Interference Screw: A Biomechanical Analysis of Humeral Fracture Risk.
Mellano CR; Frank RM; Shin JJ; Jain A; Zuke WA; Mascarenhas R; Shewman E; Cole BJ; Romeo AA; Verma NN; Forsythe B
Arthroscopy; 2018 Mar; 34(3):806-813. PubMed ID: 29287950
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Biomechanical evaluation of open suture anchor fixation versus interference screw for biceps tenodesis.
Papp DF; Skelley NW; Sutter EG; Ji JH; Wierks CH; Belkoff SM; McFarland EG
Orthopedics; 2011 Jul; 34(7):e275-8. PubMed ID: 21717988
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. The biomechanical evaluation of four fixation techniques for proximal biceps tenodesis.
Mazzocca AD; Bicos J; Santangelo S; Romeo AA; Arciero RA
Arthroscopy; 2005 Nov; 21(11):1296-306. PubMed ID: 16325079
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Biomechanical evaluation of subpectoral biceps tenodesis: dual suture anchor versus interference screw fixation.
Tashjian RZ; Henninger HB
J Shoulder Elbow Surg; 2013 Oct; 22(10):1408-12. PubMed ID: 23415819
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. A biomechanical analysis of two biceps tenodesis fixation techniques.
Richards DP; Burkhart SS
Arthroscopy; 2005 Jul; 21(7):861-6. PubMed ID: 16012500
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Arthroscopic suprapectoral and open subpectoral biceps tenodesis: a comparison of restoration of length-tension and mechanical strength between techniques.
Werner BC; Lyons ML; Evans CL; Griffin JW; Hart JM; Miller MD; Brockmeier SF
Arthroscopy; 2015 Apr; 31(4):620-7. PubMed ID: 25498870
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Biomechanical evaluation of a unicortical button versus interference screw for subpectoral biceps tenodesis.
Arora AS; Singh A; Koonce RC
Arthroscopy; 2013 Apr; 29(4):638-44. PubMed ID: 23395466
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Biomechanical comparison of intramedullary cortical button fixation and interference screw technique for subpectoral biceps tenodesis.
Buchholz A; Martetschläger F; Siebenlist S; Sandmann GH; Hapfelmeier A; Lenich A; Millett PJ; Stöckle U; Elser F
Arthroscopy; 2013 May; 29(5):845-53. PubMed ID: 23587927
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Biomechanical analysis of subpectoral biceps tenodesis: effect of screw malpositioning on proximal humeral strength.
Euler SA; Smith SD; Williams BT; Dornan GJ; Millett PJ; Wijdicks CA
Am J Sports Med; 2015 Jan; 43(1):69-74. PubMed ID: 25371439
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Suprapectoral biceps tenodesis: a biomechanical comparison of a new "soft anchor" tenodesis technique versus interference screw biceps tendon fixation.
Baleani M; Francesconi D; Zani L; Giannini S; Snyder SJ
Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon); 2015 Feb; 30(2):188-94. PubMed ID: 25533271
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Biomechanical characterization of unicortical button fixation: a novel technique for proximal subpectoral biceps tenodesis.
DeAngelis JP; Chen A; Wexler M; Hertz B; Grimaldi Bournissaint L; Nazarian A; Ramappa AJ
Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc; 2015 May; 23(5):1434-1441. PubMed ID: 24253375
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Biomechanical properties of suprapectoral biceps tenodesis: double knotless screw fixation is superior to single knotless screw fixation.
Hong CK; Chang CH; Chiang FL; Jou IM; Wang PH; Wang HN; Hsu KL; Kuan FC; Su WR
Arch Orthop Trauma Surg; 2018 Aug; 138(8):1127-1134. PubMed ID: 29767346
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Long head biceps tenotomy versus tenodesis: a cadaveric biomechanical analysis.
Wolf RS; Zheng N; Weichel D
Arthroscopy; 2005 Feb; 21(2):182-5. PubMed ID: 15689867
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Suprapectoral or subpectoral position for biceps tenodesis: biomechanical comparison of four different techniques in both positions.
Patzer T; Santo G; Olender GD; Wellmann M; Hurschler C; Schofer MD
J Shoulder Elbow Surg; 2012 Jan; 21(1):116-25. PubMed ID: 21493102
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Biomechanical performance of subpectoral biceps tenodesis: a comparison of interference screw fixation, cortical button fixation, and interference screw diameter.
Sethi PM; Rajaram A; Beitzel K; Hackett TR; Chowaniec DM; Mazzocca AD
J Shoulder Elbow Surg; 2013 Apr; 22(4):451-7. PubMed ID: 22743072
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
