Interference screw vs. suture anchor fixation for open subpectoral biceps tenodesis: does it matter?

Area of Science:

• Orthopedic surgery
• Sports medicine
• Surgical techniques

Background:

• Bioabsorbable interference screws offer superior biomechanical properties for biceps tenodesis compared to suture anchors.
• The clinical impact of different fixation techniques for biceps tenodesis remains unclear.

Purpose of the Study:

• To investigate if subpectoral interference screw fixation provides clinical advantages over suture anchor fixation for biceps tenodesis.
• To compare patient outcomes based on fixation method.

Main Methods:

• Retrospective review of 88 patients undergoing open subpectoral biceps tenodesis.
• Comparison between interference screw fixation (34 patients) and suture anchor fixation (54 patients).
• Outcomes assessed at an average of 13 months included pain, ASES scores, modified Constant scores, and complications.

Main Results:

• No fixation failures occurred in either group.
• All patients experienced significant improvements in pain and function post-surgery.
• No statistically significant differences were observed between interference screw and suture anchor fixation for pain or functional scores.

Conclusions:

• Subpectoral biceps tenodesis is a reliable procedure for pain relief and functional improvement.
• Interference screw and suture anchor fixation yield similar clinical results for biceps tenodesis.
• Suture anchors may be linked to a higher incidence of residual pain at the tenodesis site.