265 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 28460573)
1. Biomechanical Analysis of Suture Anchor vs Tenodesis Screw for FHL Transfer.
Drakos MC; Gott M; Karnovsky SC; Murphy CI; DeSandis BA; Chinitz N; Grande D; Chahine N
Foot Ankle Int; 2017 Jul; 38(7):797-801. PubMed ID: 28460573
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. 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]
3. Comparison of Staple, Anchor, and Tenodesis Screw for Posterior Tibialis Tendon Fixation: A Biomechanical Analysis.
Aslan L; Gunerbuyuk C; Gedik CC; Sarabi MR; Kilicoglu O
J Foot Ankle Surg; 2024; 63(2):194-198. PubMed ID: 37935326
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Biomechanical evaluation of two methods of fixation of a flexor hallucis longus tendon graft.
Benca E; Willegger M; Wenzel F; Hirtler L; Zandieh S; Windhager R; Schuh R
Bone Joint J; 2018 Sep; 100-B(9):1175-1181. PubMed ID: 30168756
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. A Biomechanical Analysis of Interference Screw Versus Bone Tunnel Fixation of Flexor Hallucis Longus Tendon Transfers to the Calcaneus.
Liu GT; Balldin BC; Zide JR; Chen CT
J Foot Ankle Surg; 2017; 56(4):813-816. PubMed ID: 28633783
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. 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]
7. 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]
8. Biomechanical comparison of patellar fixation techniques in medial patellofemoral ligament reconstruction.
Russ SD; Tompkins M; Nuckley D; Macalena J
Am J Sports Med; 2015 Jan; 43(1):195-9. PubMed ID: 25261087
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Flexor Hallucis Longus Tendon Transfer Fixation.
Lee J; Williams C; Lowrey C; Gould G; Markert R; Laughlin R
Foot Ankle Spec; 2017 Feb; 10(1):31-36. PubMed ID: 27604514
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. 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]
11. 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]
12. A biomechanical comparison of two arthroscopic suture techniques in biceps tenodesis: whip-stitch vs. simple suture techniques.
Agarwalla A; Puzzitiello RN; Leong NL; Shewman EF; Verma NN; Romeo AA; Forsythe B
J Shoulder Elbow Surg; 2019 Aug; 28(8):1531-1536. PubMed ID: 30948215
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Are Implant Choice and Surgical Approach Associated With Biceps Tenodesis Construct Strength? A Systematic Review and Meta-regression.
Aida HF; Shi BY; Huish EG; McFarland EG; Srikumaran U
Am J Sports Med; 2020 Apr; 48(5):1273-1280. PubMed ID: 31585053
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. 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]
15. Using Interconnected Knotless Anchor for Suprapectoral Biceps Tenodesis Could Offer Improved Biomechanical Properties in a Cadaveric Model.
Kuan FC; Hsu KL; Yen JZ; Wen MJ; Yeh ML; Chen Y; Su WR
Arthroscopy; 2020 Aug; 36(8):2047-2054. PubMed ID: 32259645
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. 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]
17. Increased Load to Failure in Biceps Tenodesis With All-Suture Suture Anchor Compared With Interference Screw: A Cadaveric Biomechanical Study.
Smuin DM; Vannatta E; Ammerman B; Stauch CM; Lewis GS; Dhawan A
Arthroscopy; 2021 Oct; 37(10):3016-3021. PubMed ID: 33895306
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Flexor Hallucis Longus Transfer Improves Achilles Tendon Load to Failure in Surgery for Non-Insertional Tendinopathy: A Biomechanical Study.
Schmidtberg B; Johnson JD; Kia C; Baldino JB; Obopilwe E; Cote MP; Geaney LE
J Bone Joint Surg Am; 2019 Aug; 101(16):1505-1512. PubMed ID: 31436659
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Biomechanical comparison of arthroscopically performable techniques for suprapectoral biceps tenodesis.
Patzer T; Rundic JM; Bobrowitsch E; Olender GD; Hurschler C; Schofer MD
Arthroscopy; 2011 Aug; 27(8):1036-47. PubMed ID: 21704467
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Interference screw versus suture anchor fixation for subpectoral tenodesis of the proximal biceps tendon: a cadaveric study.
Golish SR; Caldwell PE; Miller MD; Singanamala N; Ranawat AS; Treme G; Pearson SE; Costic R; Sekiya JK
Arthroscopy; 2008 Oct; 24(10):1103-8. PubMed ID: 19028161
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
