Regarding the Study by Golish et al.

Hapa, Onur

doi:10.1016/j.arthro.2009.07.001

« Previous Next »Arthroscopy: The Journal of Arthroscopic and Related Surgery
Volume 25, Issue 10 , Pages 1065-1066, October 2009

Regarding the Study by Golish et al.

Department of Orthopedics and Traumatology, Bolu Izzet Baysal State Hospital, Bolu, Turkey

Article Outline

References
Copyright

To the Editor:

I read with interest the article “Interference Screw Versus Suture Anchor Fixation for Subpectoral Tenodesis of the Proximal Biceps Tendon: A Cadaveric Study” by Golish et al.¹ in the October 2008 issue of Arthroscopy.

On page 1106 of the article, the authors discuss the study of Jayamoorthy et al.,² but they mistakenly cite this ovine cadaveric study as a human cadaveric study. With respect to that, the outcome of the study was such that the only difference between their human cadaveric study and the ovine study by Jayamoorthy et al. was the level of fixation on the humerus. However, the authors concluded that the reason the results of the study by Ozalay et al.,³ which was also done in an ovine model, were partially consistent with the results of Jayamoorthy et al.² was because of the species difference between the 2 studies, when in fact they were both ovine cadaveric studies.

Back to Article Outline

References

Golish RS, Caldwell PE, Miller MD, et al. Interference screw versus suture anchor fixation for subpectoral tenodesis of the proximal biceps tendon: A cadaveric study. Arthroscopy. 2008;24:1103–1108

Jayamoorthy T, Field JR, Costi JJ, Martin DK, Stanley RM, Hearn TC. Biceps tenodesis: A biomechanical study of fixation methods. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2004;13:160–164