Joint angle, moment and power compensations in dogs with fragmented medial coronoid process

Summary

Fragmented medial coronoid process (FMCP) is the most common cause of forelimb lameness in juvenile medium and large breed dogs; however methods of assessing the disruption to their gait remain subjective. The purpose of this study was to objectively quantify the mechanical disruptions to gait in dogs with arthroscopically confirmed unilateral FMCP. Seven dogs underwent full inverse dynamic analysis at the time of diagnosis. Kinematic and force data were collected from both forelimbs at trot. Stance phase joint angles, net joint moments and net joint powers were calculated using custom software. There were gross differences in kinetic and kinematic patterns between FMCP affected and compensating forelimbs. Stance time was 0.24 sec on the lame side and 0.26 sec on the compensating side. The shoulder and the elbow were more flexed at ground contact, and elbow, carpal and MCP joints had smaller ranges of motion on the lame side. Net joint moments were significantly reduced (P<0.05) in the elbow, carpal and MCP joints of the FMCP affected limb. Net joint powers were likewise significantly smaller (P<0.05). However, the overall moment and power patterns persisted. Total limb support moment was significantly smaller on the affected side (P<0.05). Total limb power was significantly reduced on the affected side (P<0.05) being most affected in its propulsive phase in the second half of stance. Inverse dynamic analysis of this clinical condition is an objective means by which to assess the mechanical disruption to gait.

Keywords

Canine elbow dysplasia - gait analysis - biomechanics

• References

• 1 Guthrie Guthrie, Pidduck HG. Heritability of elbow osteochondrosis within a closed population of dogs. J Small Anim Pract 1990; 31: 93-96.
• 2 Olsson SE. Lameness in the dog. A review of lesions causing osteoarthritis of the shoulder, elbow, hip, stifle and hock joints. Scientific Presentations of the American Animal Hospital Association Annual Meeting 1975; 42: 363-370.
• 3 Grondalen J. Arthrosis with special reference to the elbow joint of young, rapidly growing dogs (II). Occurrence, clinical and radiographic findings. Nord Vet 1979; 31: 69-75.
• 4 van Ryssen B, van Bree H. Arthroscopic findings in 100 dogs with elbow lameness. Vet Rec 1997; 140: 360-362.
• 5 Groendalen Groendalen, Groendalen T. Arthrosis in the elbow joint of young rapidly growing dogs. Nord Med 1981; 33: 1-16.
• 6 Olsson SE. The early diagnosis of fragmented cor- onoid process and osteochondrosis dissecans of the canine elbow joint. J Am Anim Hosp Assoc 1983; 19: 616-626.
• 7 Kirberger Kirberger, Fourie SL. Elbow dysplasia in the dog: Pathophysiology, diagnosis and control. J S Afr Vet Assoc 1998; 43-54.
• 8 Wind Wind, Packard MR. Elbow incongruity and developmental elbow disease in the dog. Part 1. J Am Anim Hosp Assoc 1986; 22: 711-724.
• 9 Trostel RR. Canine Elbow Dysplasia: Anatomy and Pathogenesis. Compend Contin Educ 2003; 25: 754-762.
• 10 Mason DR, Schulz KS, Fujita Y. et al. In vitro force mapping of normal canine humeroradial and humeroulnar joints. Am J Vet Res 2005; 66: 132-135.
• 11 Mason TA. Osteochondrosis of the elbow joint in young dogs. J Small Anim Pract 1980; 21: 641-656.
• 12 Huibregtse BA, Johnson AL, Muhlbauer MC. et al. The effect of treatment of fragmented coronoid process on the development of osteoarthritis of the elbow. J Am Anim Hosp Assoc. 1994 30. 190.
• 13 Tobias TA. Surgical removal of fragmented medial coronoid process in the dog: Comparative effects of surgical approach and age at the time of surgery. J Am Anim Hosp Assoc 1994; 30: 360-368.
• 14 Bouck GR, Miller CW, Taves CL. A comparison of surgical and medical treatment of fragmented coronoid process and osteochondritis dissecans of the canine elbow. Vet Comp Orthop Traumatol 1995; 8: 177-183.
• 15 Thompson Thompson, Robins GM. Osteochondrosis of the elbow, a review of the pathogenesis and a new approach to treatment. Aust Vet J. 1995 72. 375.
• 16 Ness MG. Treatment of fragmented coronoid process in young dogs by proximal ulnar osteotomy. J Small Anim Pract 1998; 39: 15-18.
• 17 Meyer-Lindenberg A, Langhann A, Fehr M. et al. Arthrotomy versus arthroscopy in the treatment of the fragmented medial coronoid process of the ulna (FCP) in 421 dogs. Vet Comp Orthop Traumatol 2003; 16: 204-210.
• 18 Tobias TA, Miyabayashi T, Olmstead ML. Surgical removal of fragmented medial coronoid process in the dog: Comparative effects of surgical approach and age at time of surgery. J Am Anim Hosp Assoc 1994; 30: 360-388.
• 19 Fitzpatrick MN, O'Riordan JO. Clinical and radiographic assessment of 83 cases of subtotal coronoid ostectomy (SCO) for the treatment of fragmented medial coronoid process (FMCP). Abstract. Proceedings of the 47th BSAVA Annual congress. 2004: 584.
• 20 DeCamp CE, Soutas-Little RW, Hauptman J. et al. Kinematic gait analysis of the trot in healthy greyhounds. Am J Vet Res 1993; 54: 627-634.
• 21 Allen K, DeCamp CE, Braden TD. et al. Kinematic gait analysis of the trot in healthy mixed breed dogs. Vet Comp Orthop Traumatol 1994; 7: 148-153.
• 22 Bertram JEA, Lee DV, Case HN. et al. Comparison of the trotting gaits of Labrador Retrievers and Greyhounds. Am J Vet Res 2000; 61: 832-838.
• 23 Nielson C, Stover SM, Schultz KS. et al. Two-dimensional link-segment model of the forelimb of dogs at a walk. Am J Vet Res 2003; 64: 609-617.
• 24 Rumph PF, Kincaid SA, Visco DM. et al. Redistribution of vertical ground reaction force in dogs with experimentally induced chronic hind limb lameness. Vet Surg 1995; 24: 384-389.
• 25 Budsberg SC. Long-term temporal evaluation of ground reaction forces during development of experimentally induced osteoarthritis in dogs. Am J Vet Res 2001; 62: 1207-1211.
• 26 Evans RE, Gordon W, Conzemius M. Effect of velocity on ground reaction forces in dogs with lameness attributable to tearing of the cranial cruciate ligament. Am J Vet Res 2003; 64: 1479-1481.
• 27 Marsolais GS, Dvorak G, Conzemius MG. Effects of postoperative rehabilitation on limb function after cranial cruciate ligament repair in dogs. J Am Vet Med Assoc 2002; 220: 1325-1330.
• 28 Conzemius M G, Evans RB, Besancon MF. et al. Effect of surgical technique on limb function after surgery for rupture of the cranial cruciate ligament in dogs. J Am Vet Med Assoc 2005; 226: 232-236.
• 29 Kirpenstein J, van den Box R, van den Brom WE. et al. Ground reaction force analysis of large breed dogs when walking after the amputation of a limb. Vet Rec 2000; 146: 155-159.
• 30 Colborne GR, Innes JF, Comerford EJ. et al. Distribution of power across the hind limb joints in Labrador Retrievers and Greyhounds. Am J Vet Res 2005; 66: 1563-1571.
• 31 Colborne GR, Walker AM, Tattersall AJ. et al. Effect of trotting velocity on work patterns of the hind limbs of Greyhounds. Am J Vet Res 2006; 67: 1293-1298.
• 32 Winter DA. Biomechanics and motor control of human movement. John Wiley and Sons; New York: 1990
• 33 Denny Denny, Butterworth SJ. Classification and investigation ofjoint disease. In: A guide to canine and feline orthopaedics. Denny HR, and Butterworth SJ. (eds). Blackwell Science; London: 2000: 42.
• 34 Houlton JEF. An approach to the lame dog or cat. In: BSAVA Manual of canine and feline musculoskeletal disorders. Houlton JEF, Cook JL, Innes JF, Langley-Hobbs SJ. (eds) British Small Animal Hospital Association; Gloucester: 2006: 6.
• 35 Griffon DJ, McLaughlin RM, Roush JK. Vertical ground reaction force redistribution during experimentally induced shoulder lameness in dogs. Vet Comp Orthop Traumatol 1994; 7: 154-157.
• 36 Rumph PF, Kincaid SA, Visco DM. et al. Redistribution of vertical ground reaction force in dogs with experimentally induced chronic hindlimb lameness. Vet Surg 1995; 24: 384-389.
• 37 Olney SJ, Griffin MP, Monga TN. et al. Work and power in gait of stroke patients. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1991; 72: 309-314.
• 38 Clayton HM, Schamhardt HC, Willemen MA. et al. Net joint moments and power in horses with superficial digital flexor tendinitis. Am J Vet Res 2000; 61: 197-201.
• 39 Colborne GR, Shellard LJ, Morris KD. Sensitivity of kinetic gait analysis to accuracy ofmorphometric variables. Proceedings of 50th Annual Congress of the British Small Animal Veterinary Association. Birmingham, UK: April 12-15 2007
• 40 Dutto DJ, Hoyt DF, Clayton HM. et al. Joint work and power for both the forelimb and hindlimb during trotting in the horse. J Exp Biol 2006; 209: 3990-3999.
• 41 Boulay JP. Fragmented medial coronoid process of the ulna in the dog. Vet Clin North Am Small Anim Pract 1998; 28: 51-74.
• 42 Lewis DD, Parker RB, Hager DA. Fragmented medial coronoid process of the canine elbow. Compend Contin Educ 1989; 11: 703-715.
• 43 Mason DR, Schulz KS, Fujita Y. et al. In vitro force mapping of normal canine humeroradial and humeroulnar joints. Am J Vet Res 2005; 66: 132-135.
• 44 Ronsky JL, Herzog W, Brown TD. In vivo quantification of the cat patellofemoral joint contact stresses and areas. J Biomech 1995; 28: 977-983.
• 45 Danielson KC, Fitzpatrick N, Muir P. et al. Histo- morphology of fragmented medial coronoid process in dogs: A comparison of affected and normal coronoid processes. Vet Surg 2006; 35: 501-509.