Biomechanical study comparing biceps wedge tenodesis with other proximal long head of the biceps tenodesis techniques

Purpose: The purpose of this biomechanical study was to compare the ultimate failure strength, stiffness, cyclic displacement, and failure displacement of 5 different proximal biceps tenodesis fixation techniques, specifically comparing wedge tenodesis with the other 4 techniques. Methods: Forty cadaveric shoulders underwent 1 of 5 long head of the biceps tenodesis techniques and were cyclically tested to failure by use of tensile forces applied parallel to the longitudinal axis of the humerus. A preload at 5 N was applied for 2 minutes, followed by cyclical loading for 500 cycles from 5 to 70 N at 1 Hz and a pull-to-failure test at 1 mm/s. The techniques studied were wedge tenodesis, suture anchor fixation, suprapectoral interference screw fixation, T-wedge tenodesis, and the percutaneous intra-articular transtendon (PITT) technique. Cyclic displacement, failure displacement, and stiffness were calculated. Results: The wedge tenodesis technique had an ultimate failure load similar to interference screw fixation and a greater ultimate failure load and stiffness than the suture anchor, PITT, and T-wedge techniques (P < .05). Conclusions: In this biomechanical study, wedge tenodesis was found to have an ultimate failure load similar to interference screw fixation and a greater ultimate failure load and stiffness than the suture anchor, PITT, and T-wedge techniques. Clinical Relevance: On biomechanical testing, wedge tenodesis compares favorably with other techniques and may be a useful clinical option for proximal biceps tenodesis.