These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.
285 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 25498870)
1. 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]
2. Arthroscopic suprapectoral and open subpectoral biceps tenodesis: a comparison of minimum 2-year clinical outcomes. Werner BC; Evans CL; Holzgrefe RE; Tuman JM; Hart JM; Carson EW; Diduch DR; Miller MD; Brockmeier SF Am J Sports Med; 2014 Nov; 42(11):2583-90. PubMed ID: 25201442 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Arthroscopic Suprapectoral and Open Subpectoral Biceps Tenodeses Produce Similar Outcomes: A Randomized Prospective Analysis. Forsythe B; Zuke WA; Agarwalla A; Puzzitiello RN; Garcia GH; Cvetanovich GL; Yanke AB; Verma NN; Romeo AA Arthroscopy; 2020 Jan; 36(1):23-32. PubMed ID: 31864581 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. No Difference in Clinical Outcomes for Arthroscopic Suprapectoral Versus Open Subpectoral Biceps Tenodesis at Midterm Follow-up: A Randomized Prospective Analysis. Forsythe B; Berlinberg EJ; Diaz CC; Korrapati A; Agarwalla A; Patel HH; Cole BJ; Cvetanovich GL; Yanke AB; Romeo AA; Verma NN Am J Sports Med; 2022 May; 50(6):1486-1494. PubMed ID: 35507468 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Anatomic and radiographic comparison of arthroscopic suprapectoral and open subpectoral biceps tenodesis sites. Johannsen AM; Macalena JA; Carson EW; Tompkins M Am J Sports Med; 2013 Dec; 41(12):2919-24. PubMed ID: 24057029 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. 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]
8. A Radiostereometric Analysis of Tendon Migration After Arthroscopic and Mini-Open Biceps Tenodesis: Interference Screw Versus Single Suture Anchor Fixation. Forsythe B; Patel HH; Berlinberg EJ; Forlenza EM; Okoroha KR; Williams BT; Yanke AB; Cole BJ; Verma NN Am J Sports Med; 2023 Sep; 51(11):2869-2880. PubMed ID: 37548005 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. 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]
10. 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]
11. 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]
12. 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]
13. Open subpectoral vs. arthroscopic proximal biceps tenodesis: A comparison study of clinical outcomes. Tu J; Xu B; Guo R Exp Ther Med; 2020 Jan; 19(1):428-434. PubMed ID: 31853318 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. 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]
15. Biomechanical comparison of the three techniques for arthroscopic suprapectoral biceps tenodesis: implant-free intraosseous tendon fixation with Cobra Guide, interference screw and suture anchor. Poberaj B; Marjanovič B; Zupančič M; Nabergoj M; Cvetko E; Balažic M; Senekovič V Musculoskelet Surg; 2020 Apr; 104(1):49-57. PubMed ID: 30762217 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Proximal Biceps Tenodesis: An Anatomic Study and Comparison of the Accuracy of Arthroscopic and Open Techniques Using Interference Screws. Kovack TJ; Idoine JD; Jacob PB Orthop J Sports Med; 2014 Feb; 2(2):2325967114522198. PubMed ID: 26535300 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Biomechanical comparison of two techniques for arthroscopic suprapectoral biceps tenodesis: interference screw versus implant-free intraosseous tendon fixation. Sampatacos N; Getelman MH; Henninger HB J Shoulder Elbow Surg; 2014 Nov; 23(11):1731-9. PubMed ID: 24810080 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Transfer of the long head of biceps to the conjoint tendon. A biomechanical study. Pastor MF; Kraemer M; Hurschler C; Claassen L; Wellmann M; Smith T Clin Biomech (Bristol); 2016 Feb; 32():80-4. PubMed ID: 26851565 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. 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]