Publikationsdatenbank

Relation of computed tomography-based static axial radioulnar incongruence measurements under general anaesthesia and dynamic, in vivo RUI during the walk in canine elbow joints with and without medial coronoid process disease (2021)

Art

Zeitschriftenartikel / wissenschaftlicher Beitrag

Autoren

Rohwedder, Thomas (WE 20)

Böttcher, Peter (WE 20)

Quelle

Veterinary and comparative orthopaedics and traumatology : V.C.O.T

Bandzählung: 34

Heftzählung: 06

Seiten: 386 – 393

ISSN: 2567-6911

Sprache

Englisch

Verweise

URL (Volltext): https://www.thieme-connect.de/products/ejournals/abstract/10.1055/s-0041-1731811

DOI: 10.1055/s-0041-1731811

Pubmed: 34344054

Kontakt

Klein- und Heimtierklinik

Oertzenweg 19 b
14163 Berlin
+49 30 838 62422
kleintierklinik@vetmed.fu-berlin.de

Abstract / Zusammenfassung

Objective:
This study aimed to evaluate the correlation of static axial radioulnar incongruence (sRUI) measured under general anaesthesia with the real in vivo dynamic RUI (dRUI) during walking.

Study Design:
This was a prospective clinical study that included 6 sound elbows (5 dogs) and 7 medial coronoid process disease (MCPD) affected elbows (6 dogs).

Materials and Methods:
Static axial radioulnar incongruence was measured using the sphere fitting technique on computed tomography-based three-dimensional (3D) models of radius and ulna. The in vivo pose of radius and ulna was derived from radiostereometric analysis during the walk and transferred onto previously calculated 3D models. Dynamic RUI was measured on those adjusted models using the sphere fitting technique, providing a measurement of RUI over time during walk.

Results:
Mean sRUI was 0.2 mm (standard deviation [SD]: 0.30) in control and 1.4 mm (SD: 0.73) in elbow joints with MCPD; being significantly different (p = 0.0035; confidence interval [CI]: 0.4772–1.8824). Mean dRUI in controls (−0.4 mm; SD: 0.47) was significantly different (p = 0.0004; CI: 0.9918–2.5225) from dRUI in the affected elbows (1.4 mm; SD: 0.73). Comparison of sRUI and dRUI within each group showed difference in the control group (0.2 vs. −0.4 mm; p = 0.0138; CI: 0.1820–1.0014). In affected elbows, no difference between sRUI and dRUI was found (1.4 vs. 1.4 mm; p = 0.8963).

Conclusion:
In normal elbow joints, sRUI does not represent the in vivo condition during weight bearing. Dynamic and slightly negative RUI occurs during loading (0.2 mm positive to −0.4 mm negative RUI). In MCPD affected elbows with sRUI, no dynamic change of RUI occurs during the walk.