Untersuchungen zur Kniegelenkwinkelung des Hundes im Hinblick auf die Ruptur des vorderen Kreuzbandes unter besonderer Berücksichtigung des Tibiaplateaus

Zusammenfassung:

Gegenstand und Ziel: Untersuchungen zum Vergleich der Kniegelenkstellung von Hunden mit und ohne vorderen Kreuzbandriss (KBR). Material und Methoden: Messung und Vergleich von Kniegelenkwinkel, Stellung des Tibiaplateaus nach Slocum, Stellung der Tibialängsachse und des Tibiaplateaus zur Waagerechten bei 61 Tieren mit (A) und 63 Tieren ohne (B) KBR. Ergebnisse: Kniegelenkwinkel (A gesunde Gliedmaßen: 119,3°, erkrankte Gliedmaßen: 117,7°; B 122,2°), die Stellung des Tibiaplateaus zur Waagerechten (A gesunde Gliedmaßen: –7,4°, erkrankte Gliedmaßen: –9,0°; B –2,0°) und die Stellung der Tibiaachse zur Waagerechten (A gesunde Gliedmaßen: 58,3°, erkrankte Gliedmaßen: 56,9°; B 63,4°) differierten zwischen den Gruppen signifikant. Bei einseitigem Kreuzbandriss lagen im Seitenvergleich im Kniegelenkwinkel (gesund: 119,2°; erkrankt: 116,5°) und der Stellung des Tibiaplateaus zur Waagerechten (gesund: –7,4°; erkrankt: –9,9°) signifikante Unterschiede vor. Die Stellung des Tibiaplateaus zur Waagerechten korrelierte in beiden Gruppen in erster Linie mit der Stellung der funktionellen Tibiaachse zur Waagerechten (A r = 0,944; B r = 0,946). Das Tibiaplateau wies in beiden Gruppen eine signifikante Abweichung von der Waagerechten auf (A –9,0°; B –2,0°). Schlussfolgerung: Die genannten Unterschiede waren trotz ihrer Signifikanz so gering ausgeprägt, dass eine klinische Relevanz nicht anzunehmen ist. Der Tibiaplateauwinkel nach Slocum korreliert nicht mit dem Kniegelenkwinkel. Klinische Relevanz: Ein KBR ruft keine wesentlichen Änderungen der Kniegelenkstellung hervor. Eine durch die Kniegelenk- oder Tibiaplateauwinkelung bedingte Prädisposition für einen KBR erscheint unwahrscheinlich. Es besteht kein Hinweis, dass der Kniegelenkwinkel in die Planung einer TPLO einbezogen werden sollte.

Summary:

Objective: Comparative study on the posture of the stifle joint in dogs with and without cranial cruciate ligament rupture (CrCLR). Material and methods: Stifle joint angle (A healthy limbs: 119.3°, diseased limbs: 117.7°; B 122.2°), and the angulation of the tibia axis and the tibial plateau in relation to the horizontal were measured and compared in 61 dogs with (A) and 63 dogs without (B) a CrCLR. Results: Stifle joint angle, angulation of the tibial plateau to the horizontal (A healthy limbs: –7.4°, diseased limbs: –9.0°; B –2.0°), and angulation of the tibia axis to the horizontal (A healthy limbs: 58.3°, diseased limbs: 56.9°; B 63.4°) were significantly different between the groups. In dogs with unilateral CrCLR significant differences between the healthy and the diseased limb were detected in the stifle joint angle (healthy: 119.2°; diseased: 116.5°) and the angulation of the tibial plateau to the horizontal (healthy: –7,4°; diseased: –9,9°). The angulation of the tibial plateau to the horizontal correlated particularly with the angulation of the tibia axis to the horizontal (A r = 0.944; B r = 0.946). Conclusions: Though significant, the described differences were small. It was concluded that the CrCLR does not lead to clinically relevant changes of the hindlimb posture in the standing dog. The tibial plateau angle according to Slocum does not correlate with the stifle joint angle. Clinical relevance: A CrCLR leads to minor changes in stifle joint posture. Neither the stifle joint nor the tibial plateau angle could be supposed to be predisposing factors for a CrCLR. There seems to be no indication to take the stifle joint angle into consideration when planning a TPLO procedure.

Schlüsselwörter:

vorderer Kreuzbandriss - Gelenkwinkel - Tibiaplateau - Hund

Key words:

Cranial cruciate ligament rupture - joint angles - tibial plateau - dog

• Literatur

• 1 Ballagas AJ, Montgomery RD, Henderson RA, Gillette R. Pre- and postoperative force plate analysis of dogs with experimentally transected cranial cruciate ligaments treated using tibial plateau leveling osteotomy. Vet Surg 2004; 33 (02) 187-190.
• 2 Conzemius M, Evans RB, Faulkner-Besancon M, Gordon W, Horstmann CL, Hoefle WD. 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 (02) 232-236.
• 3 Devine-Slocum T, Boulay J, Gores B. Tibial Plateau Measurement. Tibial Plateau Leveling Osteotomy Seminar: Course documents 2003 Oct 12. Eugene/ Oregon, USA. Eugene: Slocum Enterprises; 2003
• 4 Doverspike M, Vasseur PB, Harb MF, Walls CM. Contralateral cranial cruciate ligament rupture: incidence in 114 dogs. J Am Anim Hosp Assoc 1993; 29: 167-170.
• 5 El Fakharani MM. Korrekturosteotomie der Tibia nach Ruptur des vorderen Kreuzbandes beim Hund. Diss med vet, München. 1997
• 6 Hayashi K, Frank JD, Dubinsky C, Zhengling H, Markel MD, Manley PA. et al Histologic changes in ruptured canine cranial cruciate ligament. Vet Surg 2003; 32 (03) 269-277.
• 7 Henderson RA, Milton JL. The tibial compression mechanism: a diagnostic aid in stifle injuries. J Am Anim Hosp Assoc 1978; 14: 474-478.
• 8 Lampman TJ, Lund EM, Lipowitz AJ. Crainal cruciate disease: current status of diagnosis, surgery and risk for disease. Vet Comp Orthop Traumatol 2003; 3: 122-126.
• 9 Leighton RL. Preferred method of repair of cranial cruciate ligament rupture in dogs: a survey of ACVS diplomates specializing in canine orthopedics. American College of Veterinary Surgery. Vet Surg 1999; 28 (03) 194.
• 10 Li G, Rudy TW, Allen C, Sakane M, Woo SL. Effect of combined axial compressive and anterior tibial loads on in situ forces in the anterior cruciate ligament: a porcine study. J Orthop Res 1998; 16 (01) 122-127.
• 11 Macias C, McKee WM, May C. Caudal proximal tibial deformity and cranial cruciate ligament rupture in small-breed dogs. J Small Anim Pract 2002; 43 (10) 433-438.
• 12 Matis U, Brahm-Jorda T, Jorda C, Koestlin R. Radiographic evaluation of the progression of osteoarthritis after tibial plateau leveling osteotomy in 93 dogs. Proc 12th ESVOT Congress, Munich 2004: 250
• 13 Montavon PM, Damur DM, Tepic S. Tibial tuberosity advancement (TTA) for the treatment of cranial cruciate disease in dogs: evidences, technique and initial clinical results. Proc 12th ESVOT Congress, Munich. 2004; 254-255.
• 14 Morris E, Lipowitz AJ. Comparison of tibial plateau angles in dogs with and without cranial cruciate ligament injuries. J Am Vet Med Assoc 2001; 218 (03) 363-366.
• 15 Narama I, Masuoka-Nishiyama M, Matsuura T, Ozaki K, Nagatani M, Morishima T. Morphogenesis of degenerative changes predisposing dogs to rupture of the cranial cruciate ligament. J Vet Med Sci 1996; 58 (11) 1091-1097.
• 16 Petazzoni M. TPLO in small dogs: 18 cases. Proc 12th ESVOT Congress, Munich. 2004: 258
• 17 Rayward RM, Thomson DG, Davies JV, Innes JF, Whitelock RG. Progression of osteoarthritis following TPLO surgery: a prospective radiographic study of 40 dogs. J Small Anim Pract 2004; 45 (02) 92-97.
• 18 Read RA, Robins GM. Deformity of the proximal tibia in dogs. Vet Rec 1982; 111: 295-298.
• 19 Reif U, Hulse DA, Hauptman JG. Effect of tibial plateau leveling on stability of the canine cranial cruciate-deficient stifle joint: an in vitro study. Vet Surg 2002; 31 (02) 147-154.
• 20 Reif U, Probst CW. Comparison of tibial plateau angles in normal and cranial cruciate deficient stifles of Labrador retrievers. Vet Surg 2003; 32 (04) 385-389.
• 21 Scavelli TD, Schrader SC, Matthiesen DT, Skorup DE. Partial rupture of the cranial cruciate ligament of the stifle in dogs: 25 cases (1982–1988). J Am Vet Med Assoc 1990; 196 (07) 1135-1138.
• 22 Selmi AL, Padilha Filho JG. Rupture of the cranial cruciate ligament associated with deformity of the proximal tibia in five dogs. J Small Anim Pract 2001; 42 (08) 390-393.
• 23 Slocum B, Devine T. Cranial tibial thrust: a primary force in the canine stifle. J Am Vet Med Assoc 1983; 183 (04) 456-459.
• 24 Slocum B, Slocum TD. Tibial plateau leveling osteotomy for repair of cranial cruciate ligament rupture in the canine. Vet Clin North Am Small Anim Pract 1993; 23 (04) 777-795.
• 25 Tepic S, Damur DM, Montavon PM. Biomechanics of the stifle joint. Proc 1st ESVOT-VOS World Orthopedic Congress, Munich. 2002: 189-190.
• 26 Tepic S, Montavon PM. Is cranial tibial advancement relevant in the cruciate deficient stifle?. Proc 12th ESVOT Congress, Munich. 2004: 132-133.
• 27 Vasseur PB. Stifle joint. In: Textbook of Small Animal Surgery 3 ed.. Slatter D. ed Philadelphia: Saunders; 2003: 2090-2133.
• 28 Vasseur PB, Pool RR, Arnoczky SP, Lau RE. Correlative biomechanical and histologic study of the cranial cruciate ligament in dogs. Am J Vet Res 1985; 46 (09) 1842-1854.
• 29 Venzin C, Howard J, Rytz U, Spreng D, Schawalder P, Doherr M. et al Tibial plateau angles with and without cranial cruciate ligament rupture – Comparison between different dog populations and a wolf population. Vet Comp Orthop Traumatol 2004; 17: 232-236.
• 30 Vezzoni A, Demaria M, Corbari A, Cirla A. Non-traumatic cranial cruciate ligament injuries. Proc 1st ESVOT-VOT World Orthopedic Congress, Munich. 2002: 199-203.
• 31 Warzee CC, Dejardin LM, Arnoczky SP, Perry RL. Effect of tibial plateau leveling on cranial and caudal tibial thrusts in canine cranial cruciate-deficient stifles: an in vitro experimental study. Vet Surg 2001; 30 (03) 278-286.
• 32 Watson C, Rochat M, Payton M. Effect of weight bearing on the joint angles of the fore- and hind limb of the dog. Vet Comp Orthop Traumatol 2003; 4: 250-254.
• 33 Whitehair JG, Vasseur PB, Willits NH. Epidemiology of cranial cruciate ligament rupture in dogs. J Am Vet Med Assoc 1993; 203 (07) 1016-1019.
• 34 Wilke VL, Conzemius MG, Besancon MF, Evans RB, Ritter M. Comparison of tibial plateau angle between clinically normal Greyhounds and Labrador Retrievers with and without rupture of the cranial cruciate ligament. JAm Vet Med Assoc 2002; 221 (10) 1426-1429.
• 35 Wilke VL, Conzemius MG, Kinghorn BP, Macrossan PE, Cai W, Rothschild ME. Inheritance of rupture of the cranial cruciate ligament in Newfoundlands. J Am Vet Med Assoc 2006; 228 (01) 61-64.