Complicações decorrentes do uso de âncoras metálicas em artroscopias de ombro / Complications resulting from the use of metal anchors in shoulder arthroscopy

Objetivo: Identificar as complicações referentes ao uso de âncoras metálicas nos procedimentos artroscópicos do ombro. Métodos: No período de dezembro de 1997 a agosto de 2007,28 ombros de 28 pacientes (23 do sexo masculino e cinco do feminino) foram reoperados nos Hospitais Ortopédico, Belo Horizonte e da Polícia Militar, em Belo Horizonte, MG, devido a complicações como soltura de âncoras e âncoras proeminentes. As cirurgias primárias tiveram como objetivo tratar 20 instabilidades anteriores traumáticas (71,5%), uma instabilidade posterior(3,5%), uma lesão slap (3,5%) e seis lesões do manguito rotador (21,5%). Foram utilizadas a classificação radiográfica de Samilson e Prieto e a artroscópica de Outerbridge na avaliaçãodo grau de artrose dos pacientes. Na avaliação dos pacientes foram usados os critérios do índice da UCLA (University of Califórnia at Los Angeles). Resultados: Em todos os pacientes tratava-se de revisões artroscópicas. Em dois casos, após a retirada das âncoras havia sinais clínicos de instabilidade, optando-se, então, pela estabilização aberta pela técnica de Latarjet-Patte. Conclusões: As complicações com âncoras de sutura metálicas são decorrentes do emprego inadequado da técnica cirúrgica em artroscopia.

Objective: to identify the complications concerning the use of metal anchors in shoulder arthroscopic procedures. Methods: 28 shoulders of 28 patients (23 male and 5 female) have been re-operated in the period between December 1997 and August 2007, at Hospital Ortopédico, Belo Horizonte Hospital and Military Police Hospital in Belo Horizonte, MG, as a result of complications such as loose anchors and prominent anchors. The primary surgeries intended to treat 20 anterior traumatic instabilities (71.5%), one posterior instability (3.5%), one slap injury (3.5%), six procedures for treating injuries on the rotator cuff (21.5%). We used the X-ray classification suggested by Samilson andPrieto and Outerbridge arthroscopic classification for assessing patients' degree of arthrosis. All patients were evaluated by the UCLA (University of California at Los Angeles) index criteria.Results: In all patients, arthroscopic reviews were made. In two cases, after anchors removal, clinical signs of instability were seen, leading to the decision of providing open stabilization by Latarjet-Patte technique. Conclusion: the complications with metallic-suture anchors result from inappropriate surgical techniques applied in arthroscopy.

Percutaneous Bladder Neck Suspension using Bone Anchors for the Treatment of Stress Urinary Incontinence / 대한비뇨기과학회지

PURPOSE: We investigated the technical feasibility and clinical results of percutaneous bladder neck suspension(PBNS) using bone anchors(Vesica) which represents a minimally invasive surgical procedure for the treatment of stress urinary incontinence caused by hypermobility of the proximal urethra and bladder neck. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Among women who underwent PBNS using bone anchors for type I or type II stress urinary incontinence, 22 women were followed for at least postoperative 9 months. A miniature bone anchor was used. On each side the suture was attached to the pubocervical fascia and the vaginal wall via a broad ?Z-stitch?. Postoperative voiding status was evaluated during office follow-up visits and telephone surveys. RESULTS: Mean operation time was 32 minutes. Mean hospital stay was 0.9 days. Mean follow-up was 13 months(9 to 18 months). In the 22 patients, the procedure was successful in 18 cases(82%), with 11(50%) of the patients completely dry and 7(32%) significantly improved. Preoperative urgency was present in 10 patients(45%). Postoperative resolution rate of urgency was 60%(6 of 10 patients). In 4 cases(18%), de novo urgency was documented. Removal of the bone anchor and suture was necessary in only one patient, because of persistent vaginal infection. Other complications were transient urinary retention in 3 patients(14%), prolonged suprapubic discomfort in 1 patient(4.5%) and incidental bladder perforation in 1 patient(4.5%). Major complications such as chronic urinary retention, osteitis pubis were not noted. CONCLUSIONS: The use of this bone anchoring technique and preservation of the endopelvic fascia appears to enhance the success rate without increasing the risk to the patient and, as minimally invasive procedures, reduce the surgery time and the length of hospitalization. However, the suspension sutures of PBNS may pull through the paraurethral tissue because there is no paravesical scar formation as in open procedures. Therefore we conclude that modifications of the suspension technique should be required for the improvement of long-term results.