Radiographic landmarks for measurement of cranial tibial subluxation in the canine cruciate ligament deficient stifle

R. Plesman; A. Sharma; P. Gilbert; J. Campbell; J. D. Johnston; C. Shmon; K. Linn

doi:10.3415/VCOT-12-02-0017

Veterinary and Comparative Orthopaedics and Traumatology, Table of Contents

Vet Comp Orthop Traumatol 2012; 25(06): 478-487
DOI: 10.3415/VCOT-12-02-0017

Original Research

Schattauer GmbH

Radiographic landmarks for measurement of cranial tibial subluxation in the canine cruciate ligament deficient stifle

R. Plesman

¹Western College of Veterinary Medicine, Department of Small Animal Clinical Sciences, Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, Canada

,

A. Sharma

²College of Veterinary Medicine, University of Georgia, Athens, Georgia, USA

,

P. Gilbert

¹Western College of Veterinary Medicine, Department of Small Animal Clinical Sciences, Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, Canada

,

J. Campbell

³Western College of Veterinary Medicine, Department of Large Animal Clinical Sciences, Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, Canada

,

J. D. Johnston

⁴Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, Canada

,

C. Shmon

¹Western College of Veterinary Medicine, Department of Small Animal Clinical Sciences, Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, Canada

,

K. Linn

¹Western College of Veterinary Medicine, Department of Small Animal Clinical Sciences, Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, Canada

› Author Affiliations

Abstract

Summary

Objectives: The primary objective was to develop a repeatable radiographic technique for assessment of cranial tibial subluxation (CTS) and test the intra-observer and inter-observer repeatability of the chosen landmarks. A secondary objective was to determine the effects of digital radiographic magnification on CTS measurement repeatability.

Methods: Twenty-three normal canine pelvic limbs were used to determine the magnitude of CTS before and after transection of the cranial cruciate ligament. Mediolateral radiographs were taken with and without fiduciary markers in place. Three investigators measured the CTS using radiographically visible anatomic landmarks at two different magnifications. The total observed variabilities were assessed by inter-observer and intra-observer differences. Paired t-tests were used to determine the effect of magnification and marker presence on CTS measures.

Results: Measurement of the CTS from the caudal margin of the intercondylar fossa on the femur to the intercondylar eminence was the most repeatable. Poor correlation between the anatomic landmarks and the fiduciary bone markers was observed. We found no effect of magnification or presence or absence of bone markers on measurement of CTS.

Clinical significance: Cranial tibial subluxation can be detected with the most repeatability by measuring between the caudal margin of the intercondylar fossa and the intercondylar eminence. Magnification of the digitized radiographic image had minimal effect on repeatability. This technique can be used for in vivo analysis of the canine cruciate ligament deficient stifle joint.

Keywords

Cranial cruciate ligament - radiograph - cranial tibial subluxation - stifle

Full Text

References

References
1 Wilke VL, Robinson DA, Rothschild MF. et al. Estimate of the annual economic impact of treatment of the cranial cruciate ligament injury in dogs in the United States. J Am Vet Med Assoc 2005; 227: 1604-1607.
2 Hayashi K, Manley PA, Muir P. Cranial cruciate ligament pathophysiology in dogs with cruciate disease: a review. J Am Anim Hosp Assoc 2004; 24: 385-390.
3 Johnson J, Austin C, Breur G. Incidence of canine appendicular musculoskeletal disorders in 16 veterinary teaching hospitals from 1980 through 1989. Vet Comp Orthop Traumatol 1994; 7: 56-69.
4 Apelt D, Kowaleski MP, Boudrieau RJ. Effect of tibial tuberosity advancement on cranial tibial subluxation in canine cranial cruciate-deficient stifle joints: an in vitro experimental study. Vet Surg 2007; 36: 170-177.
5 Vasseur PB, Berry CR. Progression of stifle osteoarthritis following reconstruction of the cranial cruciate ligament in 21 dogs. J Am Anim Hosp Assoc 1992; 28: 129-136.
6 Elkins AD. A retrospective study evaluating the degree of degenerative joint disease in stifle of dogs following surgical repair of anterior cruciate ligament rupture. J Am Anim Hosp Assoc 1991; 27: 533-539.
7 Slocum B, Devine T. Cranial tibial thrust: a primary force in the canine stifle. J Am Anim Hosp Assoc 1983; 183: 456-459.
8 Vasseur PD. Clinical results following nonoperative management for rupture of the cranial cruciate ligament in dogs. Vet Surg 1984; 13: 243-246.
9 Kim SE, Pozzi A, Kowaleski MP. et al. Tibial osteotomies for cranial cruciate ligament insufficiency in dogs. Vet Surg 2008; 37: 111-125.
10 Korvick DL, Pijanowski DL, Schaeffer DJ. Three-dimensional kinematics of the intact and cranial cruciate ligament-deficient stifle of dogs. J Biomech 1994; 27: 77-87.
11 Kowaleski MP, Apelt D, Matton JS. et al. The effect of tibial plateau levelling osteotomy position on cranial tibial subluxation: an in vitro study. Vet Surg 2005; 34: 332-336.
12 Kipfer NM, Tepic S, Damur DM. et al. Effect of tibial tuberosity advancement on femoro-tibial shear in cranial cruciate-deficient stifles. Vet Comp Orthop Traumatol 2008; 21: 386-390.
13 Miller JM, Shires PK, Lanz OI. et al. Effect of 9 mm tibial tuberosity advancement on cranial tibial translation in the canine cranial cruciate ligament-deficient stifle. Vet Surg 2007; 36: 335-340.
14 Reif U, Hulse DA, Hauptman JG. Effect of tibial plateau levelling on stability of the canine cranial cruciate-deficient stifle joint: an in vitro study. Vet Surg 2002; 31: 147-154.
15 Kim SE, Lewis D, Pozzi A. et al. Radiographic quantitative assessment of cranial tibial subluxation before and after tibial plateau levelling osteotomy in dogs. Am J Vet Res 2011; 72: 410-416.
16 de Rooster H, van Bree H. Radiographic measurement of craniocaudal instability in stifle joints of clinically normal dogs and dogs with injury of a cranial cruciate ligament. Am J Vet Res 1999; 60: 1567-1570.
17 Lopez MJ, Hagquist W, Jeffrey SI. et al. Instrumented measurement of in vivo anterior-posterior translation in the canine knee to assess anterior cruciate integrity. J Orthop 2004; Res 22 949-954.
18 de Rooster H, Van Ryssen B, van Bree H. Diagnosis of cranial cruciate ligament injury in dogs by tibial compression radiography. Vet Record 1998; 142: 366-368.
19 Pozzi A, Kowaleski MP, Apelt D. et al. Effect of medial meniscal release on tibial translation after tibial plateau levelling osteotomy. Vet Surg 2006; 35: 486-494.
20 Warzee DD, Dejardin LM, Arnoczky AP. et al. Effect of tibial plateau levelling on cranial and caudal tibial thrusts in canine cranial cruciate-deficient stifles: an in vitro experimental study. Vet Surg 2001; 30: 278-286.
21 Bland JM, Altman DG. Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet 1986; i: 307-310.
22 Dohoo I, Martin W, Stryhn H. Chapter 5: Screening and diagnostic tests. In: Veterinary Epidemiologic Research. VER Inc; 2009. pg. 91-134.
23 Henderson RA, Milton JL. The tibial compression mechanism: a diagnostic aid in stifle injuries. J Am Anim Hosp Assoc 1978; 14: 474-479.
24 Arnocsky S, Marshall J. The cruciate ligaments of the canine stifle: An anatomic and functional analysis. Am J Vet Res 1977; 38: 1807-1814.
25 Reif U, Dejardin LM, Probst CW. et al. Influence of limb positioning and measurement method on the magnitude of the tibial plateau angle. 2004; Vet Surg 33: 368-375.
26 Ritter MJ, Perry RL, Olivier NB. et al. Tibial plateau symmetry and the effect of osteophytosis on tibial plateau angle measurements. J Am Anim Hos Assoc 2007; 43: 93-98.
27 Reif U, Dejardin LM, Probst CW. et al. Influence of limb positioning and measurement method on the magnitude of the tibial plateau angle. Vet Surg 2004; 33: 368-375.