Was man über Nahtanker zur Rekonstruktion der Rotatorenmanschette wissen sollte: wann welche Ankerkombination?

Zusammenfassung

Durch die Anwendung erster metallischer Ankersysteme wurde eine erhebliche Vereinfachung sowohl offener als auch arthroskopischer Operationen möglich. Mittlerweile wurden die Werkstoffe und das Design moderner Ankersysteme weiterentwickelt, sodass sich ein breiter Anwendungsbereich an der oberen und unteren Extremität etabliert hat. Prinzipiell können Fadenanker und knotenlose Anker differenziert werden. In der operativen Therapie der Rotatorenmanschettenpathologie können sowohl Fadenanker als auch knotenlose Anker separat und in Kombination angewandt werden. In diesem Artikel werden die wesentlichen Differenzierungsmerkmale der unterschiedlichen Anker dargestellt und zahlreiche Ankersysteme bez. ihrer Materialbeschaffenheit und technischen Merkmale inkl. der biomechanischen Ausreißkräfte systematisch zusammengefasst.

Abstract

The use of the first metallic anchor system initiated an appreciable simplification for both open and arthroscopic operations. In the meantime materials and designs have been further developed and thus a broad range of applications in not only the upper but also the lower limbs has become established. In principle, one can distinguish between suture anchors and knotless anchors. In the surgical treatment of rotator cuff pathologies both suture anchors and knotless anchors can be used separately and in combination. In the present article we present a systematic summary of the major special distinguishing features of the various types of anchors and numerous other anchor systems with regard to their material properties and technical features, including their biomechanical pull-out forces.

• Literatur

• 1 Barber FA, Herbert MA. Cyclic loading biomechanical analysis of the pullout strengths of rotator cuff and glenoid anchors: 2013 update. Arthroscopy 2013; 29: 832-844
• 2 Cole BJ, ElAttrache NS, Anbari A. Arthroscopic rotator cuff repairs: an anatomic and biomechanical rationale for different suture-anchor repair configurations. Arthroscopy 2007; 23: 662-669
• 3 Barber FA, Hapa O, Bynum JA. Comparative testing by cyclic loading of rotator cuff suture anchors containing multiple high-strength sutures. Arthroscopy 2010; 26 (Suppl. 09) S134-S141
• 4 Barber FA, Herbert MA, Hapa O et al. Biomechanical analysis of pullout strengths of rotator cuff and glenoid anchors: 2011 update. Arthroscopy 2011; 27: 895-905
• 5 Gerber C, Schneeberger AG, Beck M et al. Mechanical strength of repairs of the rotator cuff. J Bone Joint Surg Br 1994; 76: 371-380
• 6 Salata MJ, Sherman SL, Lin EC et al. Biomechanical evaluation of transosseous rotator cuff repair: do anchors really matter?. Am J Sports Med 2013; 41: 283-290
• 7 Vaishnav S, Millett PJ. Arthroscopic rotator cuff repair: scientific rationale, surgical technique, and early clinical and functional results of a knotless self-reinforcing double-row rotator cuff repair system. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 2010; 19 (Suppl. 02) S83-S90
• 8 Mazzocca AD, Millett PJ, Guanche CA et al. Arthroscopic single-row versus double-row suture anchor rotator cuff repair. Am J Sports Med 2005; 33: 1861-1868
• 9 Yamakado K, Katsuo S, Mizuno K et al. Medial-row failure after arthroscopic double-row rotator cuff repair. Arthroscopy 2010; 26: 430-435
• 10 Burkhart SS, Klein JR. Arthroscopic repair of rotator cuff tears associated with large bone cysts of the proximal humerus: compaction bone grafting technique. Arthroscopy 2005; 21: 1149