PetCaseFinder

Peer-reviewed veterinary case report

Complications and X-ray results after hip replacement in 97 dogs

By Bergh, M S et al.·Published in Veterinary and comparative orthopaedics and traumatology : V.C.O.T·2006·University of Pennsylvania School of Veterinary Medicine, United States·View original on PubMed

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 We do not publish original research — every detail traces back to the citation above.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: Complications and radiographic findings following cemented total hip replacement: a retrospective evaluation of 97 dogs.

Species:
dog
Hip dysplasiaMovement & jointsDogs

Plain-English summary

A group of 97 dogs that had total hip replacement surgery to relieve severe hip pain were monitored for complications and changes in their hip implants over time. While most owners were happy with the results, some dogs experienced issues like infection or loosening of the implant, leading to additional surgeries in 11 of them. Radiographic exams showed that many dogs had changes in their hip area, which could indicate problems with the implant. The study suggests that certain positioning errors during surgery might increase the risk of needing further surgery.

People also search for: dog hip replacement complications · total hip replacement for dogs · dog hip pain surgery recovery

Abstract

Cemented total hip replacement (cTHR) is commonly performed to treat intractable coxofemoral pain in dogs. While owners generally perceive a good outcome after the procedure, the longevity of the implant may be limited by complications such as infection and aseptic loosening. The objective of this retrospective study was to identify the prevalence of complications and radiographic changes following cTHR, and to identify factors that may predispose to a need for revision surgery. Medical records and radiographs from 97 dogs that underwent cTHR were evaluated for signalment, preoperative degree of osteoarthritis, technical errors, intra-operative culture results, and the post-operative radiographic appearance of the implant. The complications occurring in the intra-operative and short-term (<eight week) periods, and the radiographic appearance of the implant in the long-term (>eight week) time period were recorded. Mean (+/- SD) follow-up time was 1.1 +/- 1.6 years (range: 0-7.7 years). Seven dogs had a short-term complication and a revision surgery was performed in eleven dogs. Osseous or cement changes were radiographically detectable in the majority of cTHR. Eccentric positioning of the femoral stem and the presence of radiolucent lines at the femoral cement-bone interface were positively associated with the occurrence of revision surgery. The clinical significance of the periprosthetic radiographic changes is unclear and further investigation is warranted.

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 PubMed: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/16972000/