Use of extensible internal device in the femur of young dogs

Summary

An extensible internal device (EID) was developed to preserve growth plate during the treatment of fracture complications or segmental bone loss from tumour resection in children. Since this type of extensible, transphyseal, internal fixation device has only been used in a few paediatric cases; the aim of this study was to evaluate an in vivo canine study, a surgical application of this device, and its interference with longitudinal growth of the non-fractured distal femur. Ten clinically healthy two- to three-month-old poodles weighing 1.5–2.3 kg were used. Following a medial approach to the right distal femur, one extremity of the EID, similar to a T-plate, was fixed in the femoral condyle with two cortical screws placed below the growth plate. The other extremity, consisting of an adaptable brim with two screw holes and a plate guide, was fixed in the third distal of the femoral diaphysis with two cortical screws. The EID was removed 180 days after application. All of the dogs demonstrated full weight-bearing after surgery. The values of thigh and stifle circumferences, and stifle joint motion range did not show any difference between operated and control hindlimbs. The plate slid in the device according to longitudinal bone growth, in all but one dog. In this dog, a 10.5% shortening of the femoral shaft was observed due to a lack of EID sliding. The other dogs had the same longitudinal lengths in both femurs. The EID permits longitudinal bone growth without blocking the distal femur growth plate if appropriately placed.

Keywords

Dog - treatment - plate - femur

• References

• 1 Piermattei Piermattei, Flo GL. Fractures of the femur and patella. In: Handbook of Small Animal Orthopedics and Fracture Repair. Piermattei DL, Flo GL. (eds). Philadelphia: W.B. Saunders Company; 1997: 469-515.
• 2 Simpson Simpson, Lewis DD. Fractures ofthe femur. In: Textbook of Small Animal Surgery. Slatter DH. (ed). Philadelphia: W.B. Saunders Company; 2003: 2059-2089.
• 3 Milton JL, Horne RD, Goldstein GM. Cross-pinning: a simple technique for treatment of certain metaphyseal and physeal fractures of the long bones. J Am An Hosp Assoc 1980; 16: 891-906.
• 4 Braden TD. Histophysiology of the growth plate and growth plate injuries. In: Disease Mechanisms in Small Animal Surgery. Bojrab MJ, Smeak DD, Bloomberg MS. (eds). Philadelphia: Lea & Febiger; 1993: 1027-1041.
• 5 Johnson Johnson, Hulse DA. Femoral fractures. In: Small Animal Surgery. Fossum T. (ed). St. Louis: Mosby; 2002: 984-1004.
• 6 Baptista Baptista, Yonamine ES. Extensible internal fixation device. Rev Bras Ortop 2001; 36: 273-78.
• 7 Baptista Baptista, Yonamine ES. Internal lengthening device applied in desepiphysiodesis: a case description. Rev Bras Ortop 2003; 38: 137-144.
• 8 Armistead WW, Lumb WV. Management of distal epiphyseal fractures of the femur. North Am Vet 1952; 33: 481-484.
• 9 Parker Parker, Bloomberg MS. Modified intramedullary pin technique for repair of distal femoral physeal fractures in the dog and cat. J Am Vet Med Assoc 1984; 184: 1259-1265.
• 10 Stigen O. Supracondylar femoral fractures in 159 dogs and cats treated using a normograde intrame-dullary pinning technique. J Small Anim Pract 1999; 40: 519-523.
• 11 Fowler JD. Reconstructive microsurgical applications. In: Current techniques in small animal surgery. Bojrab MJ, Ellison GW, Slocum B. (eds). Baltimore: Williams & Wilkins; 1998: 607-622.
• 12 Newton CD. Fracture ofthe femur. In: Textbook of Small Animal Orthopaedics. Newton CD, Nunamaker DM. (eds.). New York: JB Lippincott; 1985: 415-431.
• 13 Makela EA, Vainionpaa S, Vihtonen K. et al. The effect of trauma to the lower femoral epiphyseal plate. J Bone Joint Surg 1988; 70B: 187-191.
• 14 Shires Shires, Hulse DA. Internal fixation of physeal fractures using the distal femur as an example. Cont Educ 1980; 11: 854-861.
• 15 Franczuszki D, Chalman JA, Butler HC. The use of paired pins in the fixation of distal femur fractures in the dog and cat. J Am An Hosp Assoc 1986; 22: 173-178.
• 16 Whitney Whitney, Schrader SC. Dynamic intramedullary crosspinning technique for repair of distal femoral fractures in dogs and cats: 71 cases (1981-1985). J Am Vet Med Assoc 1987; 191: 1133-1138.
• 17 Berg JR, Egger EL, Konde LJ. et al. Evaluation of prognostic factors for growth following distal femoral physeal injuries in 17 dogs. Vet Surg 1984; 13: 172-180.
• 18 Berzon J. The classification and management of epiphyseal plate fractures. J Am Anim Hosp Assoc. 1980 16. 651.
• 19 Vaughan LC. A study ofthe effect on bone growth of the experimental separation of the epiphysis. Vet Rec 1963; 75: 292-295.
• 20 Schaefer SL, Johnson KA, O'Brien RT. Compensatory tibial overgrowth healing of closed femoral fractures in young dogs. Vet Comp Orthop Traumatol 1995; 8: 159-162.
• 21 Lewis DD, Vanee RT, Oakes MG. et al. Use of reconstruction plates for stabilization of fractures and osteotomies involving the supracondylar region of the femur. J Am An Hosp Assoc 1993; 29: 171-178.
• 22 Stone EA, Betts CW, Rowland GN. Effect of Rush pins on the distal femoral growth plate of young dogs. Am J Vet Res 1981; 42: 261-265.
• 23 Fanton JW, Blass CE, Withrow SJ. Sciatic nerve injury as a complication of intramedullary pin fixation of femoral fractures. J Am An Hosp Assoc 1983; 19: 687-694.
• 24 Lidbetter Lidbetter, Glyde MR. Supracondylar femoral fractures in adult animals. Compend Cont Educ Pract Vet 2000; 22: 1041-1055.
• 25 Chico AC, Font J, Marti JM. Trochlear femoral fractures in cats: results of seven cases. Vet Comp Orthop Traumatol 2001; 14: 51-55.