Peer-reviewed veterinary case report
Surgical options for treating neck instability in small dogs
By Trębacz P et al.·2026·Department of Small Animal Surgery and Anesthesiology·View original on Europe PMC →
PetCaseFinder translated the abstract of this peer-reviewed paper into plain English so pet owners can read it. We do not publish original research — every detail traces back to the citation above. How we work →
Original publication title: A Comparison of Two Surgical Treatment Methods for Atlantoaxial Instability in Dogs: Finite Element Analysis and a Canine Cadaver Study.
- Species:
- dog
Plain-English summary
Atlantoaxial instability (AAI) is a condition that affects the neck area in small dogs, making it hard to choose the right surgical implants due to the limited space and potential complications. This study looked at three different types of implants designed to stabilize the neck in small dogs: a commonly used plate that connects the first and third neck vertebrae, a shorter plate that connects the first and second vertebrae, and a plate that attaches to the back of the neck. Researchers used advanced imaging and testing methods to see how well each implant could handle weight and stress. They also performed surgeries on nine small dogs to see how practical these implants were to use. The results showed that all the implants were safe options, but the choice of which one to use should depend on the specific needs of the dog and the surgeon's access to the area.
Abstract
Atlantoaxial instability (AAI) in toy- and small-breed dogs remains a significant clinical challenge, as the restricted anatomical space and risk of complications complicate the selection of implants. This study aimed to compare three patient-specific Ti-6Al-4V stabilizers for the C1-C2 region: a clinically used ventral C1-C3 plate, a shortened ventral C1-C2 plate, and a dorsal C1-C2 implant. Computed tomography, segmentation, virtual reduction, CAD/CAM design, and finite element analysis were employed to evaluate the linear-static mechanical behavior of each construct under loading ranging from 5 to 25 N, with a focus on displacements, von Mises stresses, and peri-screw bone strains. Additionally, cadaver procedures were performed in nine small-breed dogs using custom drill guides and additively manufactured implants to evaluate procedural feasibility and implantation time. Finite element models demonstrated that all stabilizers operated within material and biological safety limits. The C1-C3 plate exhibited the highest implant stresses, while the C1-C2 plate demonstrated an intermediate response, and the dorsal implant minimized implant stresses, albeit by increasing bone stresses. Cadaver experiments revealed that dorsal fixation required less implantation time than ventral fixation. Collectively, the findings indicate that all evaluated constructs represent safe stabilization options, and the choice of implant should reflect the preferred load-transfer pathway as well as anatomical or surgical constraints that may limit ventral access.
Find similar cases for your pet
PetCaseFinder finds other peer-reviewed reports of pets with the same symptoms, plus a plain-English summary of what was tried across them.
Search related cases →Original publication on Europe PMC: https://europepmc.org/article/MED/41598025