Peer-reviewed veterinary case report
Dog elbow function and limb load before and after arthroscopic
By Galindo-Zamora, Vladimir et al.·Published in Veterinary surgery : VS·2014·Small Animal Hospital, Germany·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 We do not publish original research — every detail traces back to the citation above.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: Evaluation of thoracic limb loads, elbow movement, and morphology in dogs before and after arthroscopic management of unilateral medial coronoid process disease.
- Species:
- dog
Plain-English summary
A group of 14 dogs with lameness in their front legs due to a condition called medial coronoid process disease (MCPD) underwent arthroscopic surgery to treat the issue. After the surgery, the dogs showed some improvement in how much weight they put on the affected leg and better symmetry in their movements, although they didn't fully regain normal function. The surgery did not significantly change the range of motion in their elbows, and some signs of arthritis worsened over time. Overall, while the dogs felt better and moved more evenly, they still had some ongoing issues.
People also search for: dog front leg lameness treatment · medial coronoid process disease in dogs · arthroscopy recovery for dogs
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To (1) evaluate thoracic limb loads and symmetry, and elbow function and morphology, before and after arthroscopic treatment of unilateral medial coronoid process disease (MCPD), and (2) determine if functional variables correlate with morphologic findings. STUDY DESIGN: Prospective case series. ANIMALS: Dogs (n = 14) with thoracic limb lameness. METHODS: Dogs were included when unilateral MCPD was confirmed as the cause of lameness. Kinetic analysis of both thoracic limbs, along with kinematic analysis and goniometry of both elbows were carried out before, and 60, 120, and 180 days after partial coronoidectomy by arthroscopy. Radiography and computed tomography of both elbows were performed before and 180 days after arthroscopy. RESULTS: A nonsignificant (P = .11) increase in the peak vertical loads (PFz), and a significant (P = .022) increase in the vertical impulse (iFz) applied by the affected limb were seen. Symmetry indices improved, with significant differences between sessions (PFz: P = .019; iFz: P = .003). Kinematic variables showed no significant differences, between sessions or when comparing both elbows within sessions. Goniometry revealed no significant differences between sessions, but some significant differences were identified when comparing both elbows within sessions. Osteophytosis and degree of lameness showed no correlation, before (rs  = -0.077; P = .79) or after arthroscopy (rs  = 0.27; P = .35). CONCLUSIONS: Kinetic variables improved after arthroscopy, without full restoration of function. Kinematic variables did not change significantly. Osteoarthritis and goniometric measurements in the affected joint worsened. Functional variables did not correlate with morphologic findings.
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/25073482/