Klinische und magnetresonanztomographische Ergebnisse nach arthroskopischer Rotatorenmanschettenrekonstruktion in „Double-row“-Technik
- 73 Downloads
- 2 Citations
Zusammenfassung
Hintergrund
Die arthroskopische Rekonstruktion von Rotatorenmanschetten (RM)-Rupturen in „Double-row“-Technik wird mit verbesserter anatomischer Rekonstruktion in Zusammenhang gebracht. Ziel dieser Studie war es, strukturelle und funktionelle Ergebnisse im Verlauf darzustellen.
Methodik
Es wurden 20 Patienten mit mittelgroßen Rupturen prospektiv erfasst. Intraoperativ wurden Rupturlokalisation, -größe, -form, sowie der Retraktionsgrad erhoben. Alle Patienten wurden nach 6, 12 und 26 Wochen nachuntersucht. Die magentresonanztomographische Kontrolle erfolgte nach einem Standardprotokoll im Niederfeld-System. Hier wurden die Sehnenintegration sowie Signalveränderungen der Sehne und der Bursae, Größe des Knöchenmarködems mit Ankerverhalten bzw. -lage, die Muskelatrophie und der Grad der Muskelverfettung bestimmt.
Ergebnisse
Bei der 6-Wochen-Kontrolle fanden sich noch Restbeschwerden mit Schmerzen. Der Constant Murley Score (34 Punkte) zeigte niedrigere Werte als präoperativ (52 Punkte). Der Constant Murley Score nach 12 Wochen zeigte einen signifikanten Anstieg von 52 auf 61 Punkte. Ebenso konnte das präoperative Kraftniveau erreicht werden. Die Schmerzen reduzierten sich bei allen Patienten. Signalveränderungen in der Sehne und den Bursae sowie das Knochenmarködem waren deutlich rückläufig und eine Sehnenintegration war in 87% der Fälle bestimmbar. Nach 26 Wochen stieg der Constant Murley Score auf 79 Punkte. Signalveränderungen in der Sehne und den Bursae sowie das Knochenmarködem normalisierten sich.
Schlussfolgerungen
Die arthroskopische „Double-row“-Rekonstruktion bei mittelgroßen RM-Rupturen stellt eine sichere Behandlungsmethode dar. Die in der MRT-Untersuchung erhobenen Parameter korrelieren mit den klinischen Ergebnissen.
Schlüsselwörter
Rotatorenmanschette Arthroskopie „Double-row“-Technik Magnetresonanztomographie SehnenintegritätAbkürzungen
- ACG
Akromioklavikulargelenk
- ADL
„Activities of daily living“ (Aktivitäten des täglichen Lebens)
- ARO
Außenrotation
- IRO
Innenrotation
- HU
„Houndsfield unit”
- MRT
Magnetresonanztomographie
- RM
Rotatorenmanschette
- ROM
„Range of motion“ (Bewegungsumfang)
Clinical and MRI results after arthroscopic rotator cuff repair using the double-row technique
Abstract
Introduction
Arthroscopic rotator cuff repair using the double-row technique is associated with improved anatomical results. The aim of our study was to compare clinical and structural results after arthroscopic reconstruction.
Methods
A total of 40 patients with a mid-size tear were included. Intraoperatively, the rupture location and size, rupture shape and retraction were documented. All patients underwent an evaluation after 6, 12, 26 and 52 weeks. The MRI examination was performed using a standard protocol in a low-field MRI. The tendon integrity, signal intensity in tendon and bursae, the size of the bone edemas, signal characteristics of the anchors, and muscular atrophy, and fatty degeneration were determined.
Results
All patients had problems including some pain at the 6-week follow-up. the Constant Murley score (34 points) was lower than that recorded preoperatively (52 points). In the MRI, one re-rupture was identified. After 12 weeks, the Constant Murley score showed an explicit increase (from 52 to 61 points). In addition, patients were able to achieve their preoperative force levels on average. All patients experienced some degree of pain relief. After 26 weeks, the Constant Murley score had risen to 79 points. The signal intensity in tendons and bursae, and the bone edemas had normalized.
Conclusions
Arthroscopic double-row repair of rotator cuff tears is a safe procedure, the structural results in the MRI correlated with the clinical results.
Keywords
Rotator cuff Arthroscopy Double-row fixation Magnetic resonance imaging Tendon injuriesNotes
Interessenkonflikt
Der korrespondierende Autor gibt an, dass kein Interessenkonflikt besteht.
Literatur
- 1.Burkhart S (2000) A stepwise approach to arthroscopic rotator cuff repair based in biomechanical principles. Arthroscopy 16:1:82–90Google Scholar
- 2.Boileau P (2005) Arthroscopic repair of full-thickness tears of the supraspinatus: does the tendon really heal. J bone Joint Surg AM 87:1229–1240PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 3.Constant CR, Murley A (1987) A clinical method of functional assessment of the shoulder. Clin Orthop 214:160–164PubMedGoogle Scholar
- 4.Davidson J, Burkhart S (2010) The geometric classification of rotator cuff tears: a system linking tear pattern to treatment and prognosis. Arthroscopy 26:3:417–424Google Scholar
- 5.Goutallier D (1994) Fatty muscle degeneration in cuff ruptures: pre- and postoperative evaluation by CT scan. Clin Orthop Relat Res 204:78–83Google Scholar
- 6.Huijsmans P (2007) Arthroscopic rotator cuff repair with double-row fixation. J Bone Joint Surg Am 89:1248–1257PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 7.Kim D (2006) Biomechanical comparison of a single-row vs double-row suture anchor repair for rotator cuff repair. Am J Sports Med 34:407–414PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 8.Lafosse (2008) The outcome and structural integrity of arthroscopic rotator cuff repair with use of a double-row suture anchor technique. J Bone Joint Surg Am 90:275–286PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 9.Liem D, Habermeyer P (2007) Magnetic resonance imaging of arthroscopic supraspinatus tendon repair. J Bone Joint Surg Am 89:1770–1776PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 10.Liem D, Habermeyer P (2007) Clinical outcome and tendon integritiy of arthroscopic vs mini-open supraspinatus tendon repair: a magnetic resonance imaging-controlled matched-pair analysis. Arthroscopy 23:5:514–521Google Scholar
- 11.Lo K, Burkhart S (2003) Double-row arthroscopic rotator cuff repair: re-establishing the footprint of the rotator cuff. Arthroscopy 19:9:1035–1042Google Scholar
- 12.Mazzocca (2005) Arthroscopic single-row vs double-row suture anchor rotator cuff repair. Am J Sports Med 33:1861–1868PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 13.Meier S (2006) The effect of double-row fixation on initial repair strength in rotator cuff repair: a biomechanical study. Arthroscopy 22:11:1168–1173Google Scholar
- 14.Patte D (1990) Classification of rotator cuff lesions. Clin Orthop 254:81–86PubMedGoogle Scholar
- 15.Sarikadis P (2010) Outcomes of single-row and double-row arthroscopic rotator cuff repair: a systematic review. J Bone Joint Surg Am 92:732–742CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 16.Scheibel M (2008) Serial MRI evaluation following arthroscopic rotator cuff repair in double row technique – preliminary results. Poster DGOU congress Berlin 2008Google Scholar
- 17.Sugaya H (2005) Functional and structural outcome after arthroscopic full-thickness rotator cuff repair: single-row vs double-row fixation. Arthroscopy 21:1307–1316PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 18.Sugaya H (2007) Repair integrity and functional outcome after arthroscopic double-row rotator cuff repair. J Bone Joint Surg Am 89:953–960PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 19.Snyder SJ (1993) Evaluation and treatment of the rotator cuff. Orthop Clin North Am 24(1)Google Scholar
- 20.Thomazeau H (1996) Atrophy of the supraspinatus belly: assessment by MRI in 55 patients with rotator cuff pathology. Acta Orthop Scand 67:264–268PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 21.Zanetti M (1998) Quantitative assessment of the muscles of the rotator cuff with magnetic resonance imaging. Invest Radiol 33:163–170PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar