Vet Comp Orthop Traumatol 2013; 26(01): 42-46
DOI: 10.3415/VCOT-11-10-0153
Original Research
Schattauer GmbH

Detection of meniscal tears by arthroscopy and arthrotomy in dogs with cranial cruciate ligament rupture

A retrospective, cohort study

Autor*innen

  • R. Plesman

    1   Department of Small Animal Clinical Sciences, Western College of Veterinary Medicine, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, Canada
  • P. Gilbert

    1   Department of Small Animal Clinical Sciences, Western College of Veterinary Medicine, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, Canada
  • J. Campbell

    2   Department of Large Animal Clinical Sciences, Western College of Veterinary Medicine, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, Canada
Weitere Informationen

Publikationsverlauf

Received 31. Oktober 2011

Accepted 23. Juli 2012

Publikationsdatum:
19. Dezember 2017 (online)

Summary

Objectives: To evaluate and compare detection of meniscal tears associated with cranial cruciate ligament insufficiency by either arthroscopy or arthrotomy.

Methods: A retrospective, cohort study was completed with stifles (n = 531) of dogs with cranial cruciate ligament rupture. Either a medial parapatellar arthrotomy or an arthroscopy procedure was performed and groups were compared for significant differences in meniscal tears detected using logistic regression analysis.

Results: Arthroscopy was performed on 58.8% and arthrotomy on 41.2% of the stifles. In total, 44.4% of the examined stifles had meniscal tears. Meniscal tears were found in 38.8% of the stifles examined by arthrotomy, and 48.4% of those examined by arthroscopy. Overall, the rate of detection of a meniscal tear was significantly different (p = 0.019) between the groups, and meniscal tears were observed more frequently by arthroscopy than by arthrotomy (odds ratio 1.54; 95% confidence interval 1.07 – 2.22).

Clinical significance: These results suggest that arthroscopy may be more sensitive than arthrotomy for detection of meniscal pathology in clinical patients. However, these results must be interpreted with caution since this was a retrospective study. Randomized prospective clinical studies are required to further test this hypothesis.