Peer-reviewed veterinary case report
How dogs walk after losing part or all of a leg
By Filho, Túlio G et al.·Published in Veterinary and comparative orthopaedics and traumatology : V.C.O.T·2024·Department of Veterinary Surgery and Animal Reproduction, Brazil·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 We do not publish original research — every detail traces back to the citation above.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: Gait Analysis of Amputee Dogs Using a Pressure-Sensitive Walkway.
- Species:
- dog
Plain-English summary
A group of 39 dogs that had lost a leg due to accidents or limb malformation underwent a special walking test to see how they adjusted their weight while moving. The study found that dogs with a forelimb amputation shifted their weight to the opposite front leg, while those with a hindlimb amputation distributed their weight differently, favoring the forelimbs more. Overall, the level of amputation didn't significantly change how they balanced, but there were some differences in weight distribution for hindlimb amputees. This information can help veterinarians understand how to support amputee dogs in their recovery and mobility.
People also search for: dog amputation recovery · how to help dog adjust after leg amputation · dog weight distribution after amputation
Abstract
OBJECTIVE:  The aim of this study was to perform gait analysis using a pressure-sensitive walkway in dogs submitted to high (total) or low amputation (partial) of one forelimb or hindlimb. STUDY DESIGN:  A total of 39 dogs met the inclusion criteria. The reasons for the amputations were motor vehicle accidents in 38 dogs and possible limb malformation in 1 dog. The amputee dogs were divided into four groups: G1 ( = 10)-high forelimb; G2 ( = 10)-low forelimb; G3 ( = 9)-high hindlimb; and G4 ( = 10)-low hindlimb. For kinetic evaluation, the dogs were walked across a pressure-sensitive walkway. RESULTS:  In dogs with forelimb amputation, the percentage of body weight (%BW) distribution on the contralateral forelimb was 50.7% in cases of high amputation and 55.5% in cases of low amputation, while the %BW distribution on the hindlimbs, mainly in the ipsilateral hindlimb, was 27.9% in cases of high amputation and 27.1% in cases of low amputation. In cases of high amputation of the hindlimb, the %BW distribution was 71.5% on the forelimbs and 29.7% on the contralateral hindlimb, while in cases of low amputation, the distribution was mainly for the contralateral hindlimb and ipsilateral forelimb. No statistical difference was noted between the amputation levels, except for the contralateral limb in cases of low and high amputation of the hindlimbs concerning the overload percentage and %BW distribution. CONCLUSION:  The amputation level of one forelimb did not influence the %BW distribution; however, in the hindlimb, this was higher for the contralateral limb in dogs submitted to high amputation.
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/38503301/