Peer-reviewed veterinary case report
How botulinum toxin A affects joint chemicals in dogs with arthritis
By Heikkilä, Helka M et al.·Published in BMC veterinary research·2017·Department of Equine and Small Animal Medicine·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 We do not publish original research — every detail traces back to the citation above.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: The effect of intra-articular botulinum toxin A on substance P, prostaglandin E, and tumor necrosis factor alpha in the canine osteoarthritic joint.
- Species:
- dog
Plain-English summary
A group of 35 dogs with chronic osteoarthritis received either an injection of botulinum toxin A or a placebo to see if it would help reduce their joint pain. After treatment, there was no significant change in certain pain-related substances in the joint fluid, suggesting that the botulinum toxin may not work by affecting those substances. However, the levels of prostaglandin E were higher in the joints of dogs with arthritis compared to healthy dogs, indicating it could be a marker for pain in osteoarthritis. Overall, the study suggests that while botulinum toxin A may help with pain, its exact mechanism isn't clear.
People also search for: dog arthritis treatment · botulinum toxin for dogs · joint pain in dogs · osteoarthritis symptoms in dogs · prostaglandin E in dogs
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Recently, intra-articular botulinum toxin A (IA BoNT A) has been shown to reduce joint pain in osteoarthritic dogs. Similar results have been reported in human patients with arthritis. However, the mechanism of the antinociceptive action of IA BoNT A is currently not known. The aim of this study was to explore this mechanism of action by investigating the effect of IA BoNT A on synovial fluid (SF) and serum substance P (SP), prostaglandin E(PGE), and tumor necrosis factor alpha (TNF-α) in osteoarthritic dogs. Additionally, the aim was to compare SF SP and PGEbetween osteoarthritic and non-osteoarthritic joints, and investigate associations between SP, PGE, osteoarthritic pain, and the signalment of dogs. Thirty-five dogs with chronic naturally occurring osteoarthritis and 13 non-osteoarthritic control dogs were included in the study. Osteoarthritic dogs received either IA BoNT A (n = 19) or IA placebo (n = 16). Serum and SF samples were collected and osteoarthritic pain was evaluated before (baseline) and 2 and 8 weeks after treatment. Osteoarthritic pain was assessed with force platform, Helsinki Chronic Pain Index, and joint palpation. Synovial fluid samples were obtained from control dogs after euthanasia. The change from baseline in SP and PGEconcentration was compared between the IA BoNT A and placebo groups. The synovial fluid SP and PGEconcentration was compared between osteoarthritic and control joints. Associations between SP, PGE, osteoarthritic pain, and the signalment of dogs were evaluated. RESULTS: There was no significant change from baseline in SP or PGEafter IA BoNT A. Synovial fluid PGEwas significantly higher in osteoarthritic compared to control joints. Synovial fluid PGEcorrelated with osteoarthritic pain. No associations were found between SP or PGEand the signalment of dogs. The concentration of TNF-α remained under the detection limit of the assay in all samples. CONCLUSIONS: The results suggest that the antinociceptive effect of IA BoNT A in the joint might not be related to the inhibition of SP nor PGE. Synovial fluid PGE, but not SP, could be a marker for chronic osteoarthritis and pain in dogs.
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/28327134/