Download PDF
Vet Comp Orthop Traumatol 1995; 08(04): 203-209
DOI: 10.1055/s-0038-1632457
Statistical Report
Schattauer GmbH

Characteristics of 1000 Femur Fractures in the Dog and Cat

T. D. Braden
1   From the Department of Small Animal Clinical Sciences, Veterinary Teaching Hospital, Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan, USA
,
S. W. Eicker
2   Section of Epidemiology, Cornell Veterinary School, Ithaca, New York
,
D. Abdinoor
3   Mobile Veterinary Surgical Services, Salem, New Hampshire, USA
,
W. D. Prieur
4   Altenweg Muehle, Liesich, Germany
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

Received for publication 10 June 1994

Publication Date:
09 February 2018 (online)

Also available at
    Permissions and Reprints

Summary

A fracture documentation study of the femur in dogs and cats was developed. It consists of frequency of type of animal involved, the type of fracture involved, and the type of repair carried out. Specifically, the data documented are: date, leg, patient number, practice number, surgeon number, sex, species, age, weight, amount overweight, fracture site, skin condition, fragment number, days trauma to surgery, Salter type, management, presurgical complications, primary fixation, secondary fixation, graft, cerclage wire, cerclage method, screw size, Kirschner wire size, pin size, plate, pins (Kirschner apparatus), bars (Kirschner apparatus). This data was collected over a five-year period from 79 surgeons in private and university practice in 10 different countries.

One thousand femur fractures were documented in this retrospective study. The type of animals and type of fractures are reported herewith. Also the type of fixation is reported. This is the most comprehensive femur fracture study reported to date.

Keywords

Fracture - documentation - femur - characteristics
 

  • REFERENCES

  • 1 Johner R, Wruks O. Classification of tibial shaft fractures and correlation with results after rigid internal fixation. Clin Orthop 1983; 178: 7-25.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Knecht CD. Fractures in cats: A survey of 100 cases. A AH A 46th Annual Meeting Proceedings. 1979: 377-80.
    Google Scholar
  • 3 Kolata RJ, Johnston DE. Motor vehicle accidents in urban dogs: A study of 600 cases. JAVMA 1975; 167: 938-41.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Hill FWG. A survey of bone fractures in the cat. J Small Anim Pract 1977; 18: 457-63.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Phillips IR. A survey of bone fractures in the dog and cat. J Small Anim Pract 1979; 20: 661-74.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Kolata RJ, Kraut NH, Johnston DE. Patterns of trauma in urban dogs and cats: A study of 1000 cases. JAVMA 1974; 164: 499-502.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Braden TD. Post-traumatic osteomyelitis. Vet Clin North Am Small Anim Pract 1991; 21: 781-811.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Umphlet RC, Johnson AL. Mandibular fractures in the dog: A retrospective study of 157 cases. Vet Surg 1990; 19: 272-5.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Boone EG, Johnson AL, Montavon P, Hohn RB. Fractures of the tibial diaphysis in dogs and cats. JAVMA 1986; 188: 41-5.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Vannine R, Smeak DD, Olmstead ML. Evaluation of surgical repair of 135 distal humeral fractures in dogs and cats. JAAHA 1988; 24: 537-45.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Braden TD, Brinker WO. Effect of certain internal fixation devices on functional limb usage in dogs. JAVMA 1973; 162: 642-6.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Blass CE, Piermattei DL, Withrow SJ, Scott RJ. Static and dynamic cerclage wire analysis. Vet Surg 1986; 15: 181-4.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar