Vet Comp Orthop Traumatol 2007; 20(03): 180-184
DOI: 10.1160/VCOT-06-09-0071
Original Research
Schattauer GmbH

Rotating dome trochleoplasty: An experimental technique for correction of patellar luxation using a feline model

M. Gillick
1   Western College of Veterinary Medicine, Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, Canada
,
K. Linn
1   Western College of Veterinary Medicine, Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, Canada
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

Received 30 September 2006

Accepted 13 July 2006

Publication Date:
21 December 2017 (online)

Summary

The purpose of this study was to compare a trochlear block recession to a rotating dome trochleoplasty, a novel technique for the correction of patellar luxation in small animals. Twenty-eight limbs were used from 14 feline cadavers. With the stifles in flexion and extension, computed tomography was utilized to compare width and depth of the trochlea, medial trochlear ridge height, trochlear articular surface area preserved, patellar contact articular surface area, patellar area covered by the trochlear ridges and patellar tilt angle. The results of this study demonstrated that a rotating dome trochleoplasty is superior to a trochlear block recession with regard to medial trochlear height, trochlear width, trochlear depth and trochlear surface area preservation. The results of this study support further biomechanical evaluation of this technique which eventually may lead to clinical trials.

 
  • References

  • 1 L'Eplattenier H, Montavon P. Patellar luxation in dogs and cats: management and treatment. Compendium 2002; 24: 292-298.
  • 2 Johnson ME. Feline patellar luxation: a retrospective case study. J Am Anim Hosp Assoc 1986; 22: 835-838.
  • 3 Houlton Houlton, Meynink SE. Medial patellar luxation the cat. J Small Anim Pract 1989; 30: 349-352.
  • 4 Engvall Engvall, Bushnell N. Patellar luxation in Abyssinian cats. Fel Prac 1990; 18: 20-22.
  • 5 Johnson AL, Probst CW, DeCamp CE. et al. Comparison of trochlear block recession and trochlear wedge recession for canine patellar luxation using a cadaver model. Vet Surg 2001; 30: 140-150.
  • 6 Talcott KW, Goring RL, deHaan JJ. Rectangular recession trochleoplasty for treatment of patellar luxation in dogs and cats. Vet Comp Orthop Traumatol 2000; 13: 39-43.
  • 7 Hulse DA. Pathophysiology and management of medial patellar luxation in the dog. Vet Med Small AnimClin 1981; 76: 43-51.
  • 8 DeAngelis DeAngelis, Hohn RB. Evaluation of surgical correction of canine patellar luxation in 142 cases. JAmVet Med Assoc 1970; 156: 587-594.
  • 9 Roush JK. Canine patellar luxation. Vet Clin North Am Small Anim Pract 1993; 23: 855-868.
  • 10 Slocum Slocum, Slocum TD. Trochlear wedge recession for medial patellar luxation - an update. Vet Clin North Am Small Anim Pract 1993; 23: 869-875.
  • 11 Seguin Seguin, Harari J. Trochlear wedge recession for the treatment ofpatellar luxation. Can Pract 1994; 19: 24-27.
  • 12 Boone EG, Hohn RB, Weisbrde SE. Trochlear recession wedge technique for patellar luxation: An experimental study. J Am Anim Hosp Assoc 1983; 19: 735-742.
  • 13 Willauer Willauer, Vasseur PB. Clinical results of surgical correction of medial luxation of the patella in dogs. VetSurg 1987; 16: 31-36.
  • 14 Roy RG, Wallace LJ, Johnston GR. et al. A retrospective evaluation of stifle osteoarthritis in dogs with bilateral medial patellar luxation and unilateral surgical repair. Vet Surg 1992; 21: 475-479.
  • 15 Piermattei DL. The Hindlimb: Approach to the stifle through a lateral incision. In: An Atlas of Surgical Approaches to the Bones and Joints of the Dog and Cat. Philadelphia: W.B. Saunders; 1993: 276-278.