Download PDF
Vet Comp Orthop Traumatol 2022; 35(02): 128-133
DOI: 10.1055/s-0041-1740620
Clinical Communication

Visibility of Transcondylar Screw Fractures in Standard and Extended Scale Computed Tomography Images

Robert Brash
1   Department of Diagnostic Imaging, Davies Veterinary Specialists, Davies, United Kingdom
,
Jose Labrador
1   Department of Diagnostic Imaging, Davies Veterinary Specialists, Davies, United Kingdom
,
Andrew Holdsworth
1   Department of Diagnostic Imaging, Davies Veterinary Specialists, Davies, United Kingdom
› Author Affiliations Funding None.
› Further Information
    Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Objective Application of extended computed tomography scale (ECTS) reconstruction to diagnose metal implant failure has been described in a single case report. The purpose of this study was to compare the features and visibility of humeral transcondylar screw fractures in standard CT scale (SCTS) and ECTS images.

Study Design Case series: CT images of dogs with fractured transcondylar screws were retrospectively reviewed and described in both SCTS and ECTS images.

Results Five dogs with a total of six transcondylar screw failures (five right and one bilateral) were reviewed. All cases had an ongoing humeral intercondylar fissure with varying degrees of stress remodelling. The fracture was seen in all screws on ECTS images, however only in three implants on SCTS images. The measured fracture gap was larger in ECTS images in all cases (range: + 0.14 mm to + 0.28mm). The three smallest fracture gaps were not seen on SCTS images. A subtle hypoattenuating streak (artefact) was visible adjacent to the screw fracture in 5/6 of cases using SCTS images. All screw fractures occurred parallel and often slightly medial to the humeral intercondylar fissure.

Conclusion Implant failure is only seen with larger fracture gaps in SCTS images, with 3/6 screw fractures not visible in SCTS compared with ECTS. A hypoattenuating streak extending perpendicular to the implant in SCTS images is suggestive of screw fracture even if this is not directly visible.

Keywords

computed tomography - screw fracture - dog - humeral intracondylar fissure - transcondylar screw

Authors' Contributions

R.B. designed study and acquired and interpreted data; he was lead author; he critically reviewed and gave final approval of the manuscript (accepting accountability for its contents). J.L. was involved in study design; data interpretation, critical review and final approval of the manuscript (accepting accountability for its contents). A.H. was involved in study conception and design; data acquisition and interpretation; critical review and final approval of the manuscript (accepting accountability for its contents).




Publication History

Received: 20 September 2021

Accepted: 17 November 2021

Article published online:
31 December 2021

© 2021. Thieme. All rights reserved.

Georg Thieme Verlag KG
Rüdigerstraße 14, 70469 Stuttgart, Germany

 

  • References

  • 1 Farrell M, Trevail T, Marshall W, Yeadon R, Carmichael S. Computed tomographic documentation of the natural progression of humeral intracondylar fissure in a cocker spaniel. Vet Surg 2011; 40 (08) 966-971
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Moores AP. Humeral intracondylar fissure in dogs. Vet Clin North Am Small Anim Pract 2021; 51 (02) 421-437
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Moores A. Humeral condylar fractures and incomplete ossification of the humeral condyle in dogs. In Pract 2006; 28 (07) 391-397
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Butterworth SJ, Innes JF. Incomplete humeral condylar fractures in the dog. J Small Anim Pract 2001; 42 (08) 394-398
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Anderson TJ, Carmichael S, Miller A. Intercondylar humeral fracture in the dog: a review of 20 cases. J Small Anim Pract 1990; 31 (09) 437-442
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Langley-Hobbs S, Sargan D, West V, Nicholson I. Incomplete ossification of the humeral condyle in springer spaniels. Vet Rec 2008; 163 (07) 225
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Moores AP, Owen MR. Incomplete ossification of the humeral condyle as the cause of lameness in dogs. Vet Comp Orthop Traumatol 2002; 15 (04) 187-194
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Carrera I, Hammond GJC, Sullivan M. Computed tomographic features of incomplete ossification of the canine humeral condyle. Vet Surg 2008; 37 (03) 226-231
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Moores AP, Moores AL. The natural history of humeral intracondylar fissure: an observational study of 30 dogs. J Small Anim Pract 2017; 58 (06) 337-341
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 McCarthy J, Woods S, Mosley JR. Long-term outcome following management of canine humeral intracondylar fissure using a medial approach and a cannulated drill system. Vet Rec 2020; 186 (15) 490
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Hattersley R, McKee M, O'Neill T. et al. Postoperative complications after surgical management of incomplete ossification of the humeral condyle in dogs. Vet Surg 2011; 40 (06) 728-733
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Chase D, Sul R, Solano M, Calvo I, Joslyn S, Farrell M. Short and long-term outcome after transcondylar screw placement to treat humeral intracondylar fissure in dogs. Vet Surg 2019; 48 (03) 299-308
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Charles EA, Ness MG, Yeadon R. Failure mode of transcondylar screws used for treatment of incomplete ossification of the humeral condyle in 5 dogs. Vet Surg 2009; 38 (02) 185-191
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Labrador J, Witte PG, Holdsworth A. Use of an extended CT scale reconstruction to diagnose metal implant failure in a canine elbow. Vet Radiol Ultrasound 2020; (April): 10-13
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Saunders J, Schwarz T. Principles of CT image interpretation. In: Schwarz T, Saunders J. eds. Veterinary Computed Tomography. 1st edition.. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell; 2011: 29-34
    Google Scholar
  • 16 Robertson ID, Thrall DE. Digital radiographic imaging. In: Thrall DE. ed. Veterinary Diagnostic Radiology. 7th edition.. St Louis: Elselvier; 2018: 23-38
    Google Scholar
  • 17 Bushberg JT, Seibert JA, Leidhold EM, Boone JM. Interaction of radiation with matter. In: Bushberg JT, Seibert JA, Leidhold EM, Boone JM. eds. The Essential Physics of Medical Imaging. 4th edition.. Philadelphia: Wolters Kluwer Health; 2020: 42-71
    Google Scholar
  • 18 Klotz E, Kalender WA, Sokiransky R, Felsenberg D. Algorithms for the reduction of CT artifacts caused by metallic implants. Med Imaging IV PACS Syst Des Eval 1990; 1990 (1234): 642-650
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Link TM, Berning W, Scherf S. et al. CT of metal implants: reduction of artifacts using an extended CT scale technique. J Comput Assist Tomogr 2000; 24 (01) 165-172
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Mullins JP, Grams MP, Herman MG, Brinkmann DH, Antolak JA. Treatment planning for metals using an extended CT number scale. J Appl Clin Med Phys 2016; 17 (06) 179-188
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Gao L, Sun H, Ni X, Fang M, Lin T. Effects of 16-bit CT imaging scanning conditions for metal implants on radiotherapy dose distribution. Oncol Lett 2018; 15 (02) 2373-2379
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Glide-Hurst C, Chen D, Zhong H, Chetty IJ. Changes realized from extended bit-depth and metal artifact reduction in CT. Med Phys 2013; 40 (06) 061711
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Fraga-Manteiga E, Shaw DJ, Dennison S, Brownlow A, Schwarz T. An optimized computed tomography protocol for metallic gunshot head trauma in a seal model. Vet Radiol Ultrasound 2014; 55 (04) 393-398
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Barrett JF, Keat N. Artifacts in CT: recognition and avoidance. Radiographics 2004; 24 (06) 1679-1691
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Katsura M, Sato J, Akahane M, Kunimatsu A, Abe O. Current and novel techniques for metal artifact reduction at CT: Practical guide for radiologists. Radiographics 2018; 38 (02) 450-461
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 De Man B, Nuyts J, Dupont P, Marchai G, Suettis P. Metal streak artifacts in x-ray computed tomography: a simulation study. IEEE Trans Nucl Sci 1999; 46 (3 Part 2): 691-696
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Kalender WA, Hebel R, Ebersberger J. Reduction of CT artifacts caused by metallic implants. Radiology 1987; 164 (02) 576-577
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar