Medullary cavity diameter of metacarpal and metatarsal bones in cats

Summary

Objectives: To compare radiography and computed tomography (CT) for the evaluation of medullary cavity diameters of metacarpal and metatarsal bones in cats and to analyse their correlation with intramedullary pin size.

Methods: Radiography and CT were performed in cadavers (n = 12). The mid-diaphysis was determined and the medullary cavity diameter was measured by two observers. Each bone was osteotomized at the mid-diaphysis, Kirschner wires were inserted, and pin size was documented. Intra- and interobserver variability was evaluated (hierarchical analysis of variance). Radiography and CT were compared (correlation analysis, a t-test for dependent samples, a Bland-Altman analysis) and pin size, radiography and CT were compared (regression and correlation analysis).

Results: Intra-observer variability was low for radiographs and CT, with an estimated median variation of 0.10 mm for radiographs and 0.12 mm for CT. Inter-observer variability was low, with a median variation of 0.03 mm for radiographs and 0.21 mm for CT. There was a high correlation between radiography and CT for the assessment of the medullary cavity diameter. A high correlation was found between pin size and measurement on radiographs, and between pin size and measurements on CT. In two cats, pin insertion was difficult or impossible.

Clinical significance: Mid-diaphyseal measurements are applicable methods for the assessment of the medullary cavity diameter in feline metacarpal and metatarsal bones regarding intramedullary pins. In some cats the medullary cavity diameter may be too small for intramedullary pinning techniques, which can be identified preoperatively on radiographs.

Keywords

Cat - metacarpus - metatarsus - medullary cavity - intramedullary pinning

• References

• 1 Kapatkin A, Howe-Smith R, Shofer F. Conservative versus surgical treatment of metacarpal and metatarsal fractures in dogs. Vet Comp Orthop Traumatol 2000; 13: 123-127.
• 2 Wernham BGJ, Roush JK. Metacarpal and metatarsal fractures in dogs. Compend Contin Educ Vet 2010; 29: E1-7.
• 3 Wind A. Fractures of the metacarpal (metatarsal) bones. Proc. Am Anim Hosp Assoc 1976; 43: 346.
• 4 Lösslein LK. Metakarpal- und Metatarsalfrakturen bei Hund und Katze. Behandlung und Ergebnisse in den Jahren 1975-1981. Dissertation Thesis, LMU Munich. 1982
• 5 Benedetti LT, Berry K, Bloomberg M. A technique for intramedullary pinning of metatarsals and metacarpals in cats and dogs. J Am Anim Hosp Assoc 1986; 22: 149-152.
• 6 Anderson MA, Payne JT, Constantinescu GM. Managing fractures and related injuries of the distal extremities in dogs and cats. Vet Med 1993; 88: 957-968.
• 7 Degasperi B, Gradner G, Dupré G. Intramedullary pinning of metacarpal and metatarsal fractures in cats using a simple distraction technique. Vet Surg 2007; 36: 382-388.
• 8 Zahn K, Kornmayer M, Matis U. ‘Dowel’ pinning for feline metacarpal and metatarsal fractures. Vet Comp Orthop Traumatol 2007; 20: 256-263.
• 9 Prabhugoankar NV, Jayaprakash R, Ayyappan S. et al. Surgical management of metacarpal fractures in a dog. Indian J Anim Hlth 2006; 45: 87-90.
• 10 Okumura M, Watanabe K, Kadosawa T. et al. Surgical salvage from comminuted metatarsal fracture using a weight-bearing pin-putty apparatus in a dog. Aus Vet J 2000; 78: 95-98.
• 11 Fitzpatrick N, Riordan JO, Smith TJ. et al. Combined intramedullary and external skeletal fixation of metatarsal and metacarpal fractures in 12 dogs and 19 cats. Vet Surg 2011; 40: 1015-1022.
• 12 Ebraheim NA, Haman SP, Lu J. et al. Anatomical and radiological considerations of the fifth metatarsal bone. Foot Ankle Int 2000; 21: 212-215.
• 13 Li LW, Liu Y, Li CQ. X-ray measurements of partial bones in the right hand of the normal Tibetan adults and its clinical significance. Sichuan Journal of Anatomy 2006: 3.
• 14 Hanson PD, Markel MD. Radiographic geometric variation of equine long bones. Am J Vet Res 1994; 55: 1220-1227.
• 15 Dixon WJ. BMDP Statistical Software Manual. Volume 1 and 2. Berkeley: University of California Press; 1993
• 16 Piermattei DL, Flo GL, DeCamp CE. Fractures and other orthopedic conditions of the carpus, metacarpus, and phalanges. In: Brinker, Piermattei, and Flo’s Handbook of Small Animal Orthopedics and Fracture Repair. 4th ed. St. Louis: Elsevier; 2006: 412-420.
• 17 Probst CW, Millis DL. Carpus and Digits. In Slatter D. Editor Textbook of Small Animal Surgery. 3rd ed. Philadelphia: Saunders; 2002: 1974-1988.
• 18 Evans HE. Bones of the thoracic limb – Metacarpus. In Miller’s Anatomy of the dog. 3rd ed. Philadelphia: Saunders; 1993: 194-195.
• 19 Bushberg JT. Artifacts. In Bushberg JT, Seibert JA, Leidholdt EM. et al. Editors The Essential Physics of Medical Imaging. 2nd edition. Philadelphia: Lippincott William & Wilkins; 2002: 369-372.
• 20 Schwarz T. Artifacts in CT. In Schwarz T, Saunders J. Editors Veterinary Computed Tomography. 1st edition. Ames, Iowa: Wiley Blackwell; 2011: 35-54.
• 21 Simpson D, Goldsmid S. Pancarpal arthrodesis in a cat: A case report and anatomical study. Vet Comp Orthop Traumatol 1994; 7: 45-50.
• 22 Hiney KM, Nielsen BD, Rosenstein D. Short-duration exercise and confinement alters bone mineral content and shape in weanling horses. J Anim Sci 2004; 82: 2313-2320.
• 23 Hiney KM, Nielsen BD, Rosenstein D. et al. High-intensity exercise of short duration alters bovine density and shape. J Anim Sci 2004; 82: 1612-1620.
• 24 Johnson KA, Skinner GA, Muir P. Site-specific adaptive remodeling of Greyhound metacarpal cortical bone subjected to asymmetrical cyclic loading. Am J Vet Res 2001; 62: 787-793.
• 25 Von Werthern CJ, Bernasconi CE. Application of the maxillofacial mini-plate compact 1.0 in the fracture repair of 12 cats / 2 dogs. Vet Comp Orthop Traumatol 2000; 13: 92-96.
• 26 De La Puerta B, Emmerson T, Moores AP. et al. Epoxy putty external skeletal fixation for fractures of the four main metacarpal and metatarsal bones in cats and dogs. Vet Comp Orthop Traumatol 2008; 21: 451-458.