Related Experiment Video
Updated: May 8, 2026

A Minimally Invasive Model to Analyze Endochondral Fracture Healing in Mice Under Standardized Biomechanical Conditions
Published on: March 22, 2018
Biomechanical comparisons of all--suture suspensory button vs. interference screw for inlay subpectoral bicep
Fa-Chuan Kuan1, Kai-Lan Hsu1, Fang-Hsien Lin2
1Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, National Cheng Kung University Hospital, College of Medicine, National Cheng Kung University, Tainan, Taiwan; Skeleton Materials and Bio-compatibility Core Lab, Research Center of Clinical Medicine, National Cheng Kung University Hospital, College of Medicine, National Cheng Kung University, Tainan, Taiwan; Medical Device Innovation Center, National Cheng Kung University, Tainan, Taiwan.
Background:
All-suture buttons (ASBs) and interference screw (IS) are commonly utilized in the inlay subpectoral biceps tendon tenodesis. However, the biomechanical characteristics of these two methods have not been compared directly. The aim of present study was to compare the biomechanical properties of ASB vs. IS for inlay subpectoral biceps tendon tenodesis in a human cadaveric model.
Methods:
Sixteen fresh-frozen human cadaveric shoulders were randomly divided into two experimental inlay biceps tenodesis groups: ASB or IS. After tenodesis, every specimen was preloaded at 5 N for 2 minutes, followed with a cyclic loading test from 5 to 70 N for 500 load cycles. Then the load-to-failure test was performed. Afterward, the humerus was placed in a cylinder tube and secured with anchoring cement. Lastly, a two-point bending test was performed to determine the strength of the humerus. Destructive axial force was applied, and the failure strength and displacement were recorded.
Results:
No difference in stiffness was observed between the two groups (ASB = 27.4 ± 3.5 N/mm vs. IS = 29.7 ± 3.0 N/mm; P = .270). Cyclic displacement was significantly greater in the ASB group (6.8 ± 2.6 mm) than the IS group (3.8 ± 1.1 mm; P = .021). In terms of failure load, there were no statistical differences among the two groups (P = .234). The ASB group was able to withstand significantly greater displacement (11.9 ± 1.6 mm) before failure than the IS group (7.8 ± 1.5 mm; P = .001). During the humeral bending test, the ASB group exhibited significantly greater maximal load (2354.8 ± 285.1 N vs. 2086.4 ± 296.1 N; P = .046) and larger displacement (17.8 ± 2.8 mm vs. 14.1 ± 2.8 mm; P = .027) before fracture.
Conclusions:
In inlay subpectoral bicep tenodesis, ASB fixation appears to offer comparable stiffness and failure load to that of IS fixation. Additionally, the ASB group exhibited greater resistance to load and displacement before humeral fracture. However, the ASB group did demonstrate increased cyclic displacement compared to IS group.
More Related Videos
Related Concept Videos
Comparison Between Electrical And Gravitational Forces
Since both are inverse square law forces, the distance gets canceled when the ratio of the two forces is considered. Instead, the ratio of the electrical and gravitational forces depends on...
Introduction to force
Machines: Problem Solving II
Upward Impending Motion
To better comprehend how a screw jack functions, consider the completely unraveled thread as a block in contact with the...
Applications of Stress
The...
Pressure Relationships in Thoracic Cavity
Breathing Mechanisms
Both intra-alveolar and intrapleural pressures rely on specific lung properties. The ability to breathe—allowing air to enter the lungs during...

