Biomechanical performance of subpectoral biceps tenodesis: a comparison of interference screw fixation, cortical button fixation, and interference screw diameter

Background toral biceps tenodesis with interference screw fixation allows reproducible positioning of the tendon to help maintain the length–tension relationship. The aim of our study was to evaluate the role of cortical button fixation in isolation or as an augment to interference screw fixation and to determine if the diameter of the interference screw affected fixation strength. als and methods -two cadaveric shoulders were dissected and randomized to 1 of 4 groups: (1) 7-mm interference screw and cortical button, (2) cortical button alone, (3) 7-mm interference screw, or (4) 8-mm interference screw. Testing was performed on a materials testing system with a 100-N load cycled at 1 Hz for 5000 cycles, followed by an axial load to failure test. Cyclic displacement, ultimate load to failure, and site of failure were recorded for each specimen. s an ultimate failure loads were 7-mm interference screw with cortical button augmentation, 237.8 ± 120.4 N; cortical button alone, 99.4 ± 16.9 N; 7-mm interference screw, 275.5 ± 56 N; 8-mm interference screw, 277.1 ± 42.1 N. All specimens failed through tendon failure at the screw–tendon–bone interface. sions omechanical performance of subpectoral biceps tenodesis with interference screw fixation was not improved with cortical button augmentation. In addition, cortical button fixation alone yielded a significantly lower ultimate load to failure compared with interference screws. Finally, the biomechanical performance of smaller-diameter interference screws with matching bone tunnels was not affected by interference screw diameter.