Download PDF
Vet Comp Orthop Traumatol 2015; 28(02): 116-123
DOI: 10.3415/VCOT-14-02-0022
Original Research
Schattauer GmbH

Risk factors for tibial tuberosity fracture after tibial tuberosity advancement in dogs

A. E. Nutt
1   Glasgow University Veterinary School, Division of Small Animal Sciences, Glasgow, Scotland, UK
,
P. Garcia-Fernandez
2   Facultad de Veterinaria, Universidad Complutense de Madrid, Departamento de Medicina y Cirugia Animal, Madrid, Spain
,
F. San Roman
2   Facultad de Veterinaria, Universidad Complutense de Madrid, Departamento de Medicina y Cirugia Animal, Madrid, Spain
,
T. Parkin
3   Glasgow University Veterinary School, Division of Large Animal Clinical Sciences and Public Health, Glasgow, Scotland, UK
,
I. Calvo
1   Glasgow University Veterinary School, Division of Small Animal Sciences, Glasgow, Scotland, UK
4   Previous institution: University College Dublin, Section of Veterinary Sciences, School of veterinary Medicine, Dublin, Republic of Ireland
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

Received:04 February 2014

Accepted:11 February 2014

Publication Date:
26 December 2017 (online)

Also available at
    Permissions and Reprints

Summary

Objective: To retrospectively identify factors that predispose to tibial tuberosity (TT) fracture after tibial tuberosity advancement (TTA) in dogs.

Methods: The medical records and radio-graphs of a group of control dogs (n = 212) that had TTA surgery (n = 241 procedures) and did not sustain a fracture between 2008 and 2013, and those of 12 dogs that did sustain a fracture (n = 13 procedures) between 2008 and 2013 at two veterinary teaching hospitals were evaluated to determine the effect of signalment, body weight and surgical inaccuracies on TT fracture. Multivariable logistic regression was performed with the occurrence of TT fracture as the outcome variable of interest.

Results: Signalment and body weight were not found to be associated with TT fracture. Of the surgical inaccuracies, osteotomy shape (p = 0.003), plate position (p = 0.009), and cage position (p = 0.039) were factors significantly associated with TT fracture.

Clinical significance: This study provides data to support the hypothesis that poor plate position, poor cage position, and narrow distal osteotomy width are associated with TT fracture after TTA. We conclude that it is of paramount importance to pay careful attention to surgical technique in order to reduce this risk.

Keywords

Dogs - TTA - fracture - complication - tibial tuberosity - tibial tuberosity advancement
 

  • References

  • 1 Arnoczky SP. Pathomechanics of cruciate ligament and meniscal injuries. In Borjab MJ. editor Disease Mechanisms in Small Animal Surgery. 2nd ed. Philadelphia: Lea and Febiger; 1993: 764
    Google Scholar
  • 2 Morris E, Lipowitz AJ. Comparison of tibial plateau angles in dogs with and without cranial cruciate ligament injuries. J Am Anim Hosp Assoc 2001; 218: 363-366.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Slauterbeck JR, Pankratz K, Xu KT. et al. Canine ovariohysterectomy and orchiectomy increases the prevalence of ACL injury. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2004; 429: 301-305.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Lapman TJ, Lund EM, Lipowitz AJ. Cranial cruciate disease: current status of diagnosis, surgery and risk for disease. Vet Comp Orthop Traumatol 2003; 16: 122-126.
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Whitehair JG, Vasseur PB, Willits NH. Epidemiology of cranial cruciate ligament rupture in dogs. J Am Vet Med Assoc 1993; 203: 1016-1019.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Wingfield C, Amis AA, Stead AC. et al. Comparison of the biomechanical properties of Rottweiler and racing Greyhound cranial cruciate ligaments. J Small Anim Pract 2000; 41: 303-307.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Hayashi K, Frank JD, Dubinsky C. et al. Histologic changes in ruptured canine cranial cruciate ligament. Vet Surg 2003; 32: 269-277.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Niebauer GW. Immunological changes in canine cruciate ligament rupture. Res Vet Sci 1982; 32: 235-241.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Tashman S, Aderst W, Kolowich P. et al. Kinematics of the ACL-deficient canine knee during gait: serial changes over two years. J Orthop Res 2004; 22: 931-941.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Montavon PM, Damur DM, Tepic S. Advancement of the tibial tuberosity for the treatment of cranial cruciate deficient canine stifle. Proceedings of the 1st World Orthopaedic Veterinary Congress. 2002. September 5-8 Munich, Germany: 152.
    Google Scholar
  • 11 Tepic S, Damur DM, Montavon PM. Biomechanics of the stifle joint. Proceedings of the 1st World Orthopaedic Veterinary Congress. 2002. September 5-8 Munich, Germany: 189-190.
    Google Scholar
  • 12 Tepic S, Montavon PM. Is cranial tibial advancement relevant in the cruciate deficient stifle?. Proceedings of the 12th ESVOT Congress. 2004. September 10-12 Munich, Germany: 132-133.
    Google Scholar
  • 13 Apelt A, Kowaleski MP, Boudrieau RJ. Effect of tibial tuberosity advancement on cranial tibial subluxation in canine cranial cruciate-deficient stifle joints: an in vitro experimental study. Vet Surg 2007; 36: 170-177.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Miller JM, Shires PK, Lanz OI. et al. Effect of 9 mm tibial tuberosity advancement on cranial tibial translation in the canine cruciate ligament-deficient stifle. Vet Surg 2007; 36: 335-340.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Moore KW, Read RA. Cranial cruciate ligament rupture in the dog: a retrospective study comparing surgical techniques. Aust Vet J 1995; 72: 281-285.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Kipfer NM, Tepic S, Damur DM. et al. Effect of tibial tuberosity advancement on femorotibial shear in cranial cruciate-deficient stifles. An in vitro study. Vet Comp Orthop Traumatol 2008; 21: 385-390.
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Dennler R, Kipfer NM, Tepic S. et al. Inclination of the patellar ligament in relation to flexion angle in stifle joints of dogs without degenerative joint disease. Am J Vet Res 2006; 67: 1849-1854.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Hoffmann DE, Miller JM, Ober CP. et al. Tibial tuberosity advancement in 65 canine stifles. Vet Comp Orthop Traumatol 2006; 19: 219-227.
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Lafaver S, Miller NA, Stubbs WP. et al. Tibial tuberosity advancement for stabilization of the canine cranial cruciate ligament-deficient stifle joint: surgical technique, early results, and complications in 101 dogs. Vet Surg 2007; 36: 573-586.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Stein S, Schmoekel H. Short-term and eight to 12 months results of a tibial tuberosity advancement as treatment of canine cranial cruciate ligament damage. J Small Anim Pract 2008; 49: 398-404.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Hirshenson MS, Krotscheck U, Thompson MS. et al. Evaluation of complications and short-term outcome after unilateral or single-session bilateral tibial tuberosity advancement for cranial cruciate rupture in dogs. Vet Comp Orthop Traumatol 2012; 25: 402-409.
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Wolf RE, Scavelli TD, Hoelzler MG. et al. Surgical and postoperative complications associated with tibial tuberosity advancement for cranial cruciate ligament rupture in dogs: 458 cases (2007-2009). J Am Vet Med Assoc 2012; 240: 1481-1487.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Steinberg EJ, Prata RG, Palazzini K. et al. Tibial tuberosity advancement for treatment of CrCL injury: Complications and owner satisfaction. J Am Anim Hosp Assoc 2011; 47: 250-257.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Dymond NL, Goldsmid SE, Simpson DJ. Tibial tuberosity advancement in 92 canine stifles: initial results, clinical outcome and owner evaluation. Aust Vet J 2010; 88: 381-385.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Boudrieau RJ. Tibial plateau leveling osteotomy or tibial tuberosity advancement?. Vet Surg 2009; 38: 1-22.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Bergh MS, Rajala-Schultz P, Johnson KA. Risk factors for tibial tuberosity fracture after tibial plateau leveling osteotomy in dogs. Vet Surg 2008; 37: 374-82.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Calvo I, Yeadon R, Bennett D. Tibial tuberosity fracture as a complication of tibial tuberosity advancement: Risk factors. Proceedings of the 2011 BSAVA Congress. 2011. March 31 - April 3 Birmingham, UK: 442.
    Google Scholar
  • 28 Calvo I, Yeadon R, Chase D. et al. Tibial tuberosity fracture as a complication of tibial tuberosity advancement: Risk factors and management. Proceedings of the III World Veterinary Orthopaedic Congress. 2010. September 15-18 Bologna, Italy: pg 89.
    Google Scholar
  • 29 Piermattei DL, Johnson KA. Approach to the stifle joint through a medial incision. In: An Atlas of Approaches to the Bone and Joints of the Dog and Cat. 4th Ed. Philadelphia: WB Saunders; 2004: 346-349.
    Google Scholar
  • 30 Inauen R, Koch D, Bass M. et al. Tibial tuberosity conformation as a risk factor for cranial cruciate ligament rupture in the dog. Vet Comp Orthop Traumatol 2009; 22: 16-20.
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 31 Hill's Petcare. Right weight for your breed. [Cited on 2014 January 16]. Available from http://www.hillspet.ie/en-ie/weight-management/dog.html#is-your-dog-in-good-shape
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 32 Calvo I, Aisa J, Chase D. et al. Tibial tuberosity fracture as a complication of tibial tuberosity advancement. Vet Comp Orthop Traumatol 2014; 27: 148-154.
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 33 Proot LJL, Corr SA. Clinical audit for the tibial tuberosity advancement procedure. Vet Comp Orthop Traumatol 2013; 4: 280-284.
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 34 Cheung LK, Zhang Q, Wong MC. et al. Stability consideration for internal maxillary distractors. J Craniomaxillofac Surg 2003; 31: 142-148.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 35 Miranda MA. Locking plate technology and its role in osteoporotic fractures. Injury 2007; 38 S3 S35-S39.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 36 Stariner DL. Breaking up is hard to do: The heartbreak of dichotomizing continuous data. Can J Psychiatry 2002; 47: 262-266.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 37 Baneshi MR, Talei AR. Dichotomisation of Continuous Data: Review of Methods, Advantages, and Disadvantages. Iran J Cancer Prev 2011; 1: 26-32.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar