Computer-assisted gait analysis of the dog: Comparison of two surgical techniques for the ruptured cranial cruciate ligament

J. Böddeker; S. Drüen; A. Meyer-Lindenberg; M. Fehr; I. Nolte; P. Wefstaedt

doi:10.3415/VCOT-10-02-0025

Veterinary and Comparative Orthopaedics and Traumatology, Table of Contents

Vet Comp Orthop Traumatol 2012; 25(01): 11-21
DOI: 10.3415/VCOT-10-02-0025

Original Research

Schattauer GmbH

Computer-assisted gait analysis of the dog: Comparison of two surgical techniques for the ruptured cranial cruciate ligament

Authors

J. Böddeker

¹University of Veterinary Medicine Hannover, Foundation, Small Animal Clinic, Hannover, Germany
S. Drüen

¹University of Veterinary Medicine Hannover, Foundation, Small Animal Clinic, Hannover, Germany
A. Meyer-Lindenberg

¹University of Veterinary Medicine Hannover, Foundation, Small Animal Clinic, Hannover, Germany
M. Fehr

¹University of Veterinary Medicine Hannover, Foundation, Small Animal Clinic, Hannover, Germany
I. Nolte

¹University of Veterinary Medicine Hannover, Foundation, Small Animal Clinic, Hannover, Germany
P. Wefstaedt

¹University of Veterinary Medicine Hannover, Foundation, Small Animal Clinic, Hannover, Germany

Abstract

Summary

Objectives: To compare the improvement in degree of lameness following surgical repair of cranial cruciate ligament rupture in dogs using computer-assisted gait analysis.

Methods: Two groups of 14 dogs were used. One group was treated by a capsular-fascial imbrication method, and the other group by tibial plateau levelling osteotomy (TPLO). All dogs underwent gait analysis prior to surgery, as well as at four days, four weeks, and four months after surgery. Symmetry indices of vertical ground reaction forces as well as vertical ground reaction forces in % body weight, joint angles and certain gait cycle parameters were evaluated.

Results: Four months after surgery, the degree of lameness expressed as symmetry index for peak vertical force for the TPLO group (5.83%) was not significantly different to the capsular-fascial imbrication group (19.05%). Within the TPLO group, there was a significantly increased ability to extend the stifle joint four months after surgery. The stifle motion pattern of the capsular-fascial imbrication group as well as the range-of-motion in both groups showed very little change at the time of the last gait analysis. The complication rate was greater in the TPLO group than in the capsular-fascial group.

Clinical significance: In conclusion the results suggest that the TPLO method leads to a faster recovery and improved limb function in comparison to the capsular-fascial imbrication method four months after surgery. Further analyses are needed to determine if the TPLO method is superior concerning long-term joint stability.

Online supplementary material: A video of the three-dimensional kinematic model is available online at: http://www.vcot-online.com

Keywords

Tibial plateau levelling osteotomy - capsularfascial imbrication method - ground reaction forces - joint angles - instrumented treadmill

Full Text

References

References
1 Johnson JA, Austin C, Breur GJ. Incidence of canine appendicular musculoskeletal disorders in 16 veterinary teaching hospitals from 1980 through 1989. Vet Comp Orthop Traumatol 1994; 7: 56-69.
2 Innes JF, Bacon D, Lynch C. et al. Long-term outcome of surgery for dogs with cranial cruciate ligament deficiency. Vet Rec 2000; 147: 325-328.
3 Off W, Matis U. Ganganalyse beim Hund Teil 1: Dynamometrische und kinemetrische Meßverfahren und ihre Anwendung beim Tetrapoden [Gait analysis in dogs. Part I: Dynamometric and kinemetric measurement methods and their application in tetrapods]. Tierärztl Prax 1997; 25: 8-14.
4 Waxman AS, Robinson DA, Evans RB. et al. Relationship between objective and subjective assessment of limb function in normal dogs with an experimentally induced lameness. Vet Surg 2008; 37: 241-246.
5 Anderson MA. Force plate analysis: a non-invasive tool for gait evaluation. Comp Cont Ed Pract Vat 1994; 16: 857-867.
6 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.
7 Hottinger HA, DeCamp CE, Olivier NB. et al. Noninvasive kinematic analysis of the walk in healthy large-breed dogs. Am J. Vet Res 1996; 57: 381-388.
8 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.
9 Clements DN, Owen MR, Carmichael S. et al. Kinematic analysis of the gait of 10 labrador retrievers during treadmill locomotion. Vet Rec 2005; 156: 478-481.
10 Gradner G, Bockstahler B, Peham C. et al. Kinematic study of back movement in clinically sound malinois dogs with consideration of the effect of radiographic changes in the lumbosacral junction. Vet Surg 2007; 36: 472-481.
11 Bockstahler BA, Müller M, Henninger W. et al. Kinetische und kinematische Analyse der Bewegung (Ganganalyse) der Vorderextremitäten bei gesunden Militärhunden – Erhebung von Basis-werten [Kinetic and kinematic analysis of movement (gait alalysis) of the forelimbs in healthy military dogs – Ascertainment of basic values]. Wien Tierärztl Mschr 2008; 95: 127-138.
12 Bockstahler BA, Skalicky M, Peham C. et al. Reliability of ground reaction forces measured on a treadmill system in healthy dogs. Vet J 2005; 173: 373-378.
13 Leighton RL. Preferred method of repair of cranial cruciate ligament rupture in dogs: a survey of ACVS Diplomates specializing in canine orthopaedics. Vet Surg 1999; 28: 194
14 Cook JL, Luther JK, Beetem J. et al. Clinical comparison of a novel extracapsular stabilization procedure and tibial plateau leveling osteotomy for treatment of cranial cruciate ligament deficiency in dogs. Vet Surg 2010; 39: 315-323.
15 Fitzpatrick N, Solano MA. Predictive variables for complications after TPLO with stifle inspection by arthrotomy in 1000 consecutive dogs. Vet Surg 2010; 39: 460-474.
16 Ertelt J, Fehr M. Cranial cruciate ligament repair in dogs with and without meniscal lesions treated by different minimally invasive methods. Vet Comp Orthop Traumatol 2009; 22: 21-26.
17 Stauffer KD, Tuttle TA, Elkins AD. et al. Complications associated with 696 tibial plateau leveling osteotomies (2001–2003). J Am Anim Hosp Assoc 2006; 42: 44-50.
18 Rayward RM, Thomson DG, Davies JV. et al. Progression of osteoarthritis following TPLO surgery: a prospective radiographic study of 40 dogs. J Small Anim Pract 2004; 45: 92-97.
19 Boudrieau RJ. Tibial plateau leveling osteotomy or tibial tuberosity advancement?. Vet Surg 2009; 38: 1-22.
20 Priddy NH, Tomlinson JL, Dodam JR. et al. Complications with and owner assessment of the outcome of tibial plateau leveling osteotomy for treatment of cranial cruciate ligament rupture in dogs: 193 cases (1997–2001). J Am Vet Med Assoc 2003; 222: 1726-1732.
21 Conzemius MG, 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.
22 Allgoewer I, Richter A, Grüning G. et al. Zwei intraextraartikuläre Stabilisationsmethoden zur Therapie der Ruptur des Ligamentum cruciatum craniale im Vergleich: Methode (mod.) nach FLO und Methode nach MEUTSTEGE [Two intra- and extra-articular stabilization methods for the treatment of cranial cruciate ligament rupture in comparison to the FLO (mod.) and MEUSTEGE methods]. Kleintierprax 2000; 45: 95-103.
23 Kealy RD, Lawler DF, Ballam JM. et al. Effects of diet restriction on life span and age-related changes in dogs. J Am Vet Med Assoc 2002; 220: 1315-1320.
24 Slocum B, Devine Slocum T. Meniscal Release. In: Bojrab MJ. editor. Current Techniques in Small Animal Surgery. 5th ed.. Baltimore: Williams & Wilkins; 2005: 1197-1199.
25 Budsberg SC, Jevens DJ, Brown J. et al. Evaluation of limb symmetry indices, using ground reaction forces in healthy dogs. Am J Vet Res 1993; 54: 1569-1574.
26 Slocum B, Slocum TD. Tibial plateau leveling osteotomy for repair of cranial cruciate ligament rupture in the canine. Vet Clin North Am Small Anim Pract 1993; 23: 777-795.
27 Löhe F, Graeb C, Jauch W. Klinische und experimentelle Studien – Notwendigkeit oder lästige Pflicht [Clinical and experimental studies: A necessity or an annoying task?. In: Krukemeyer MG, Spiegel HU. editors. Chirurgische Forschung [Surgical Research]. Stuttgart: Georg Thieme Verla;g 2005; 197-204.
28 Rumph PS, Kincaid SA, Vicso DM. Redistribution of vertical ground reaction force in dogs with experimentally induced chronic hindlimb lameness. Vet Surg 1995; 24: 384-389.
29 Jevens DJ, DeCamp CE, Hauptmann JG. et al. Use of force-plate analysis of gait to compare two surgical techniques for treatment of cranial cruciate ligament rupture in dogs. Am J Vet Res 1996; 57: 383-393.
30 Alt F. Vergleichende Untersuchung zur Therapie der Rutur des Ligamentum cruciatum craniale beim Hund mit drei verschiedenen extraartikulären Operationsverfahren [Comparative study on the treatment of cranial cruciate ligament rupture in dogs with three different extra-articular surgical procedures][dissertation]. Hannover, Germany: Tierärztliche Hochschule; 2000
31 Thieman KM, Pozzi A, Ling HY. et al. Comparison of contact mechanics of three meniscal repair techniques and partial meniscectomy in cadaveric dog stifles. Vet Surg 2010; 39: 355-362.
32 Doverspike M, Vasseur PB, Harb MF. et al. Contra lateral cranial cruciate ligament rupture: incidence in 114 dogs. J Am Anim Hosp Assoc 1993; 29: 167-170.
33 Ballagas AJ, Montgomery RD, Henderson RA. et al. Pre- and postoperative force plate analysis of dogs with experimentally transected cranial cruciate ligaments treated using tibial plateau leveling osteotomy. Vet Surg 2004; 33: 187-190.
34 Budsberg SC, Verstraete MC, Soutas-Little RW. et al. Force plate analyses before and after stabilization of canine stifles for cruciate injury. Am J Vet Res 1988; 49: 1522-1524.
35 Chailleux N, Lussier B, De Guise J. et al. In vitro 3–dimensional kinematic evaluation of 2 corrective operations for cranial cruciate ligament-defiecient stifle. Can J Vet Res 2007; 71: 175-180.
36 Pacchina PD, Morris E, Gillings SL. et al. Surgical and postoperative complications associated with tibial plateau leveling osteotomy in dogs with cranial cruciate ligament rupture: 397 cases (1998–2001). J Am Vet Med Assoc 2003; 222: 184-193.
37 Vaughan LC. Complications associated with internal fixation of fractures in dogs. J Small Anim Pract 1975; 16: 415-423.
38 Metelman LA, Schwarz PD, Salman M. et al. An evaluation of three different cranial cruciate ligament surgical stabilization procedures as they relate to postoperative meniscal injuries. Vet Comp Orthop Traumatol 1995; 8: 118-123.
39 Lazar TP, Berry CR, Dehaan JJ. et al. Long-term radiographic comparison of tibial plateau levelling osteotomy versus extracapsular stabilization for cranial cruciate ligament rupture in the dog. Vet Surg 2005; 34: 133-141.
40 Au KK, Gordon-Evans WJ, Dunning D. et al. Comparison of short- and long-term function and radiographic osteoarthrosis in dogs after postoperative physical rehabilitation and tibial plateau leveling osteotomy or lateral fabellar suture stabilization. Vet Surg 2010; 39: 173-180.