Interlocking nail treatment of long-bone fractures in cats: 33 cases (1995–2004)

M. C. Díaz-Bertrana; I. Durall; J. L. Puchol; A. Sánchez; J. Franch

doi:10.1055/s-0038-1632950

Veterinary and Comparative Orthopaedics and Traumatology, Table of Contents

Vet Comp Orthop Traumatol 2005; 18(03): 119-126
DOI: 10.1055/s-0038-1632950

Clinical Communication

Schattauer GmbH

Interlocking nail treatment of long-bone fractures in cats: 33 cases (1995–2004)

M. C. Díaz-Bertrana

¹Departamento de Medicina y Cirugía Animal, Facultad de Veterinaria, Universidad Autónoma de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain

,

I. Durall

¹Departamento de Medicina y Cirugía Animal, Facultad de Veterinaria, Universidad Autónoma de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain

,

J. L. Puchol

²Clínica Veterinaria Puerta de Hierro, Madrid, Spain

,

A. Sánchez

³Centro Veterinario Arturo Soria, Madrid, Spain

,

J. Franch

¹Departamento de Medicina y Cirugía Animal, Facultad de Veterinaria, Universidad Autónoma de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain

› Author Affiliations

Abstract

Summary

A retrospective study between 1995 and 2004 of fracture repair in cats (n=46) using interlocking nails (ILN) was made. Only the cases in which clinical and radiographic examination of bone healing were available are included. Five humeral and twenty eight femoral fractures were reviewed. Multiple-hole interlocking nails (MH-ILN) were used in 22 fractures, with the four-hole model (FH-ILN) in the remaining cases. In three of the cases, the FH-ILN was transformed to a three-hole model by cutting the nail between the two most distal holes. The average length of humeral ILN was 78.8 mm, and the femoral ILN was 97.2 mm. Static fixation was performed in 27 cases, with dynamic fixation in the remaining. The medullary canal filling was 100% in both radiographic views in 16 cases. Intra-operative complications were encountered in two cases. A total number of 76 screws were inserted, with 5.26% of them being malpositioned. Malunion, in a deformed femur, and partial unscrewing of one screw were the only radiographic complications observed at the time of follow-up. The clinical outcome, as well as fracture healing, were excellent in all of the cases. The results of this study indicate that the 4.0 and 5.0 mm MH-ILN and FH-ILN can be used to repair simple or comminuted humeral and femoral fractures in cats.

Keywords

Interlocking nail - femoral - humeral - fracture - cats

Full Text

References

References
1 Bernarde A, Diop A, Maurel N. et al. An in vitro biomechanical comparison between bone plate and interlocking nail. 3-D interfragmentary motion and bone strain analysis in ostectomized canine femurs. Vet Comp Orthop Traumatol 2002; 15: 57-66.
2 Braden TD, Brinker WO. Radiologic and Gross Anatomic Evaluation of Bone Healing in the Dog. JAmVet Med Assoc 1976; 8: 642-6.
3 Bucholz RW, Ross SE, Lawrence KL. Fatigue fracture of interlocking nail in the treatment of the fractures of the distal part of the femoral shaft. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1987; 69: 1391-9.
4 Claes L, Augat P, Suger G. et al. Influence of Size and Stability of the Osteotomy Gap on the Success of Fracture Healing. J Orthop Res 1997; 15: 577-84.
5 Duda GN, Eckert-Hübner K, Sokiranski R. et al. Analysis of inter-fragmentary movement as a function of musculoskeletal loading conditions in sheep. J Biomech 1998; 31: 201-10.
6 Dueland RT, Berglund L, Vanderby Jr R. et al. Structural Properties of Interlocking Nails, Canine Femora, and Femur-Interlocking Nail Constructs. Vet Surg 1996; 25: 386-96.
7 Dueland RT, Vanderby Jr R, McCabe RP. Fatigue Study of Six and Eight mm Diameter Interlocking Nails with Screws Holes of Variable Size and Number. Vet Comp Orthop Traumatol 1997; 10: 194-9.
8 Dueland RT, Johnson KA, Roe SC. et al. Interlocking nail treatment of diaphyseal long-bone fracture in dogs. J Am Vet Med Assoc 1999; 214: 59-66.
9 Duhautois B. Use of veterinary interlocking nails for diaphyseal fractures in dogs and cats:121 cases. Vet Surg 2003; 32: 8-20.
10 Durall I, Diaz MC, Morales I. Interlocking Nail Stabilization of Humeral Fractures. Initial Experience in Seven Clinical Cases. Vet Comp Orthop Traumatol 1994; 7: 3-8.
11 Durall I, Diaz MC. Early experience with the use of an interlocking nail for the repair of canine femoral shaft fractures. Vet Surg 1996; 25: 397-406.
12 Durall I, Diaz-Bertrana MC. Use of interlocking nails in small dogs and cats. 33rd Annual Scientific Meeting ACVS. Chicago: 1998: 449-51.
13 Endo K, Nakamura K, Maeda H. et al. Interlocking intramedullary nail method for the treatment of femoral and tibial fractures in cats and small dogs. J Vet Med Sci 1998; 60: 119-22.
14 Gauthier O, Gouin F, Aguado E. et al. Mise au point d un modèle expérimental de résection diaphysaire massive chez le chien. Rev Méd Vét 1997; 148: 317-22.
15 Goodship AE, Kenwright J. The influence of induced micromovements upon the healing of experimental tibial fractures. J Bone Joint Surg Br 1985; 67: 650-5.
16 Hajeck PD, Bicknell HR, Bronson WE. et al. The use of one compared with two distal screws in the treatment of femoral shaft fractures with interlocking intramedullary nailing. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1993; 75: 519-25.
17 Horstman CL, Beale BS. Long bone fracture repair using the interlocking nail in a minimally invasive surgical procedure in cats and dogs. 65 cases (1994-2001). Vet Comp Orthop Traumatol 2002; 2: A6.
18 Horstman CL, Beale BS, Conzemius MG. et al. Biological osteosynthesis versus traditional anatomic reconstruction of 20 long-bone fractures using an interlocking nail: 1994-2001. Vet Surg 2004; 33: 232-7.
19 Huckstep RL. The intramedullary compression nail for difficult femoral fractures. In: Concepts in IntramedullaryNailing, SeligsonD(ed). Orlando: Grune & Straton 1985; 315-47.
20 Huckstep RL. The Huckstep intramedullary compression nail. Indications, technique and results. Clin Orthop Rel Res 1986; 212: 48-61.
21 Huckstep RL. Stabilization and prosthetic replacement in difficult fractures and bone tumors. Clin Orthop Rel Res 1987; 224: 12-25.
22 Huckstep RL. The Huckstep interlocking nail for difficult humeral, forearm and tibial fractures and for arthrodesis. Tech Orthop 1988; 3: 77-87.
23 Klemm KW, Börner M. Interlocking nailing of complex fractures of the femur and tibia. Clin Orthop 1986; 212: 89-100.
24 Larin A, Eich CS, Parker RB. et al. Repair of diaphyseal femoral fractures in cats using interlocking intramedullary nails: 12 cases (1996-2000). J Am Vet Med Assoc 2001; 219: 1098-104.
25 Lorinson D, Gròsslinger K. Fracture treatment with interlocking nail system in dogs and cats. 11th Annual Scientific Meeting ECVS. Vienna, Austria: 2002: 285-6.
26 Moses PA, Lewis DD, Lanz OI. et al. Intramedullary interlocking nail stabilization of 21 humeral fractures in 19 dogs and one cat. Aus Vet J 2002; 80: 336-43.
27 Park SH, O'Connor K, McKellop H. et al. The influence of active transverse or compressive motion on fracture-healing. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1998; 80-A: 868-78.
28 Rand JA, An KN, Chao EY. et al. A comparison of the effect of open intramedullarynailing and compression-plate fixation on fracture-site blood flow and fracture union. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1981; 63-A: 427-42.
29 Straw RC, Powers BE, Withrow S J. et al. The effect of intramedullary polymethylmethacrylate on healing of intercalary cortical allografts in a canine model. J Orthop Res 1992; 10: 434-9.
30 Suber JT, Basinger RR, Keller WG. Two unreported modes of interlocking nail failure: breakout and screw bending. Vet Comp Orthop Traumatol 2002; 15: 228-32.
31 Vannozzi I, Carlucci F, Nest S. IL chiodo bloccato di Grosse-Kempf nelle fratture diafisarie di femore nei piccoli animali: prime esperienze cliniche. Boll Assoc Ital Vet Picc Anim 1991; 3: 53-60.
32 Woodart PL, Self J, Calhoun J. et al. The effect of implant axial and torsional stiffness on fracture healing. J Orthop Trauma 1988; 1: 331-40.