Download PDF
Vet Comp Orthop Traumatol 2008; 21(02): 110-118
DOI: 10.3415/VCOT-07-04-0038
Original Research
Schattauer GmbH

Joint angle, moment and power compensations in dogs with fragmented medial coronoid process

N. J. Burton
1   Department of Clinical Veterinary Science, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
,
J. A. Dobney
2   Department of Anatomy, Faculty of Medical and Veterinary Sciences, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
,
M. R. Owen
1   Department of Clinical Veterinary Science, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
,
G. R. Colborne
2   Department of Anatomy, Faculty of Medical and Veterinary Sciences, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

Received 18 April 2007

Accepted 10 July 2007

Publication Date:
17 December 2017 (online)

    Permissions and Reprints

Summary

Fragmented medial coronoid process (FMCP) is the most common cause of forelimb lameness in juvenile medium and large breed dogs; however methods of assessing the disruption to their gait remain subjective. The purpose of this study was to objectively quantify the mechanical disruptions to gait in dogs with arthroscopically confirmed unilateral FMCP. Seven dogs underwent full inverse dynamic analysis at the time of diagnosis. Kinematic and force data were collected from both forelimbs at trot. Stance phase joint angles, net joint moments and net joint powers were calculated using custom software. There were gross differences in kinetic and kinematic patterns between FMCP affected and compensating forelimbs. Stance time was 0.24 sec on the lame side and 0.26 sec on the compensating side. The shoulder and the elbow were more flexed at ground contact, and elbow, carpal and MCP joints had smaller ranges of motion on the lame side. Net joint moments were significantly reduced (P<0.05) in the elbow, carpal and MCP joints of the FMCP affected limb. Net joint powers were likewise significantly smaller (P<0.05). However, the overall moment and power patterns persisted. Total limb support moment was significantly smaller on the affected side (P<0.05). Total limb power was significantly reduced on the affected side (P<0.05) being most affected in its propulsive phase in the second half of stance. Inverse dynamic analysis of this clinical condition is an objective means by which to assess the mechanical disruption to gait.

Keywords

Canine elbow dysplasia - gait analysis - biomechanics
 

  • References

  • 1 Guthrie Guthrie, Pidduck HG. Heritability of elbow osteochondrosis within a closed population of dogs. J Small Anim Pract 1990; 31: 93-96.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Olsson SE. Lameness in the dog. A review of lesions causing osteoarthritis of the shoulder, elbow, hip, stifle and hock joints. Scientific Presentations of the American Animal Hospital Association Annual Meeting 1975; 42: 363-370.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Grondalen J. Arthrosis with special reference to the elbow joint of young, rapidly growing dogs (II). Occurrence, clinical and radiographic findings. Nord Vet 1979; 31: 69-75.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 van Ryssen B, van Bree H. Arthroscopic findings in 100 dogs with elbow lameness. Vet Rec 1997; 140: 360-362.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Groendalen Groendalen, Groendalen T. Arthrosis in the elbow joint of young rapidly growing dogs. Nord Med 1981; 33: 1-16.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Olsson SE. The early diagnosis of fragmented cor- onoid process and osteochondrosis dissecans of the canine elbow joint. J Am Anim Hosp Assoc 1983; 19: 616-626.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Kirberger Kirberger, Fourie SL. Elbow dysplasia in the dog: Pathophysiology, diagnosis and control. J S Afr Vet Assoc 1998; 43-54.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Wind Wind, Packard MR. Elbow incongruity and developmental elbow disease in the dog. Part 1. J Am Anim Hosp Assoc 1986; 22: 711-724.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Trostel RR. Canine Elbow Dysplasia: Anatomy and Pathogenesis. Compend Contin Educ 2003; 25: 754-762.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Mason DR, Schulz KS, Fujita Y. et al. In vitro force mapping of normal canine humeroradial and humeroulnar joints. Am J Vet Res 2005; 66: 132-135.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Mason TA. Osteochondrosis of the elbow joint in young dogs. J Small Anim Pract 1980; 21: 641-656.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Huibregtse BA, Johnson AL, Muhlbauer MC. et al. The effect of treatment of fragmented coronoid process on the development of osteoarthritis of the elbow. J Am Anim Hosp Assoc. 1994 30. 190.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Tobias TA. Surgical removal of fragmented medial coronoid process in the dog: Comparative effects of surgical approach and age at the time of surgery. J Am Anim Hosp Assoc 1994; 30: 360-368.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Bouck GR, Miller CW, Taves CL. A comparison of surgical and medical treatment of fragmented coronoid process and osteochondritis dissecans of the canine elbow. Vet Comp Orthop Traumatol 1995; 8: 177-183.
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Thompson Thompson, Robins GM. Osteochondrosis of the elbow, a review of the pathogenesis and a new approach to treatment. Aust Vet J. 1995 72. 375.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Ness MG. Treatment of fragmented coronoid process in young dogs by proximal ulnar osteotomy. J Small Anim Pract 1998; 39: 15-18.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Meyer-Lindenberg A, Langhann A, Fehr M. et al. Arthrotomy versus arthroscopy in the treatment of the fragmented medial coronoid process of the ulna (FCP) in 421 dogs. Vet Comp Orthop Traumatol 2003; 16: 204-210.
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Tobias TA, Miyabayashi T, Olmstead ML. Surgical removal of fragmented medial coronoid process in the dog: Comparative effects of surgical approach and age at time of surgery. J Am Anim Hosp Assoc 1994; 30: 360-388.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Fitzpatrick MN, O'Riordan JO. Clinical and radiographic assessment of 83 cases of subtotal coronoid ostectomy (SCO) for the treatment of fragmented medial coronoid process (FMCP). Abstract. Proceedings of the 47th BSAVA Annual congress. 2004: 584.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 DeCamp CE, Soutas-Little RW, Hauptman J. et al. Kinematic gait analysis of the trot in healthy greyhounds. Am J Vet Res 1993; 54: 627-634.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Allen K, DeCamp CE, Braden TD. et al. Kinematic gait analysis of the trot in healthy mixed breed dogs. Vet Comp Orthop Traumatol 1994; 7: 148-153.
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Bertram JEA, Lee DV, Case HN. et al. Comparison of the trotting gaits of Labrador Retrievers and Greyhounds. Am J Vet Res 2000; 61: 832-838.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Nielson C, Stover SM, Schultz KS. et al. Two-dimensional link-segment model of the forelimb of dogs at a walk. Am J Vet Res 2003; 64: 609-617.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Rumph PF, Kincaid SA, Visco DM. et al. Redistribution of vertical ground reaction force in dogs with experimentally induced chronic hind limb lameness. Vet Surg 1995; 24: 384-389.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Budsberg SC. Long-term temporal evaluation of ground reaction forces during development of experimentally induced osteoarthritis in dogs. Am J Vet Res 2001; 62: 1207-1211.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Evans RE, Gordon W, Conzemius M. Effect of velocity on ground reaction forces in dogs with lameness attributable to tearing of the cranial cruciate ligament. Am J Vet Res 2003; 64: 1479-1481.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Marsolais GS, Dvorak G, Conzemius MG. Effects of postoperative rehabilitation on limb function after cranial cruciate ligament repair in dogs. J Am Vet Med Assoc 2002; 220: 1325-1330.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Conzemius M G, Evans RB, Besancon MF. et al. Effect of surgical technique on limb function after surgery for rupture of the cranial cruciate ligament in dogs. J Am Vet Med Assoc 2005; 226: 232-236.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Kirpenstein J, van den Box R, van den Brom WE. et al. Ground reaction force analysis of large breed dogs when walking after the amputation of a limb. Vet Rec 2000; 146: 155-159.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Colborne GR, Innes JF, Comerford EJ. et al. Distribution of power across the hind limb joints in Labrador Retrievers and Greyhounds. Am J Vet Res 2005; 66: 1563-1571.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 31 Colborne GR, Walker AM, Tattersall AJ. et al. Effect of trotting velocity on work patterns of the hind limbs of Greyhounds. Am J Vet Res 2006; 67: 1293-1298.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 32 Winter DA. Biomechanics and motor control of human movement. John Wiley and Sons; New York: 1990
    Google Scholar
  • 33 Denny Denny, Butterworth SJ. Classification and investigation ofjoint disease. In: A guide to canine and feline orthopaedics. Denny HR, and Butterworth SJ. (eds). Blackwell Science; London: 2000: 42.
    Google Scholar
  • 34 Houlton JEF. An approach to the lame dog or cat. In: BSAVA Manual of canine and feline musculoskeletal disorders. Houlton JEF, Cook JL, Innes JF, Langley-Hobbs SJ. (eds) British Small Animal Hospital Association; Gloucester: 2006: 6.
    Google Scholar
  • 35 Griffon DJ, McLaughlin RM, Roush JK. Vertical ground reaction force redistribution during experimentally induced shoulder lameness in dogs. Vet Comp Orthop Traumatol 1994; 7: 154-157.
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 36 Rumph PF, Kincaid SA, Visco DM. et al. Redistribution of vertical ground reaction force in dogs with experimentally induced chronic hindlimb lameness. Vet Surg 1995; 24: 384-389.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 37 Olney SJ, Griffin MP, Monga TN. et al. Work and power in gait of stroke patients. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1991; 72: 309-314.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 38 Clayton HM, Schamhardt HC, Willemen MA. et al. Net joint moments and power in horses with superficial digital flexor tendinitis. Am J Vet Res 2000; 61: 197-201.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 39 Colborne GR, Shellard LJ, Morris KD. Sensitivity of kinetic gait analysis to accuracy ofmorphometric variables. Proceedings of 50th Annual Congress of the British Small Animal Veterinary Association. Birmingham, UK: April 12-15 2007
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 40 Dutto DJ, Hoyt DF, Clayton HM. et al. Joint work and power for both the forelimb and hindlimb during trotting in the horse. J Exp Biol 2006; 209: 3990-3999.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 41 Boulay JP. Fragmented medial coronoid process of the ulna in the dog. Vet Clin North Am Small Anim Pract 1998; 28: 51-74.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 42 Lewis DD, Parker RB, Hager DA. Fragmented medial coronoid process of the canine elbow. Compend Contin Educ 1989; 11: 703-715.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 43 Mason DR, Schulz KS, Fujita Y. et al. In vitro force mapping of normal canine humeroradial and humeroulnar joints. Am J Vet Res 2005; 66: 132-135.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 44 Ronsky JL, Herzog W, Brown TD. In vivo quantification of the cat patellofemoral joint contact stresses and areas. J Biomech 1995; 28: 977-983.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 45 Danielson KC, Fitzpatrick N, Muir P. et al. Histo- morphology of fragmented medial coronoid process in dogs: A comparison of affected and normal coronoid processes. Vet Surg 2006; 35: 501-509.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar