Download PDF
Vet Comp Orthop Traumatol 2013; 26(01): 47-53
DOI: 10.3415/VCOT-11-12-0176
Original Research
Schattauer GmbH

Mechanical testing of a new osteotomy design for tibial tuberosity advancement using the Modified Maquet Technique

L. Brunel
1   Department of Clinical Sciences, Division of Small Animal Surgery, College of Veterinary Medicine, University of Liège, Belgium
,
S. Etchepareborde
1   Department of Clinical Sciences, Division of Small Animal Surgery, College of Veterinary Medicine, University of Liège, Belgium
,
N. Barthélémy
1   Department of Clinical Sciences, Division of Small Animal Surgery, College of Veterinary Medicine, University of Liège, Belgium
,
F. Farnir
2   Department of Animal Production, College of Veterinary Medicine, University of Liège, Belgium
,
M. Balligand
1   Department of Clinical Sciences, Division of Small Animal Surgery, College of Veterinary Medicine, University of Liège, Belgium
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

Received 15 December 2011

Accepted 26 July 2012

Publication Date:
19 December 2017 (online)

Also available at
    Permissions and Reprints

Summary

Objectives: To evaluate the mechanical properties of the distal cortical hinge associated with a new osteotomy design for the Modified Maquet Technique (MMT).

Study design: Ex vivo mechanical study.

Methods: The osteotomy was started 10 mm caudal to the tibial tuberosity and extended over 150% of the length of the tibial crest; it was slightly curved distally to stay at a distance of 2 to 4 mm from the cranial cortex, according to the body weight. Ninety-six tibiae were tested in advancement, and 60 tibiae were axially loaded perpendicular to the tibial plateau, until failure of the crest. Desired advancement was measured using the common tangent method in 60 tibiae. Angle of opening, thickness, and area of the cortical hinge were recorded.

Results: Desired advancement of 6 mm, 9 mm, 12 mm and 15 mm was recorded in 16, 12, 18 and 14 tibiae respectively. Mean maximal advancement in these bones was 15.6 ± 6.4 mm, 20.8 ± 5.2 mm, 21.3 ± 5.2 mm and 22.7 ± 5.2 mm respectively. The desired advancement was reached in all but one tibia. Advancement was mainly influenced by the angle of opening and the stiffness of the cortical hinge. Mean ultimate load to failure was 6.12 ± 2.4 times the body weight. It was significantly associated with the body weight, thickness, and area of the cortical hinge.

Clinical relevance: Mean maximal advancement was higher than clinically required without occurrence of fissure or fracture. Ultimate load to failure and maximal advancement could be predicted using calculated formulae.

Keywords

Cranial cruciate ligament - modified Maquet Technique - tibial tuberosity advancement - biomechanics
 

  • References

  • 1 Apelt D, 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.
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 2 Apelt D, Pozzi A, Marcellin-Little DJ. et al. Effect of cranial tibial closing wedge angle on tibial subluxation: an ex vivo study. Vet Surg 2010; 39: 454-459.
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 3 Bruce WJ, Rose A, Tuke J. et al. Evaluation of the triple tibial osteotomy. A new technique for the management of the canine cruciate-deficient stifle. Vet Comp Orthop Traumatol 2007; 20: 159-168.
    Thieme ConnectPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 4 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.
    Thieme ConnectPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 5 Reif U, Hulse DA, Hauptman JG. Effect of tibial plateau leveling on stability of the canine cranial cruciate-deficient stifle joint: an in vitro study. Vet Surg 2002; 31: 147-154.
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 6 Slocum B, Devine T. Cranial tibial thrust: a primary force in the canine stifle. J Am Vet Med Assoc 1983; 183: 456-459.
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 7 Tonks CA, Lewis DD, Pozzi A. A review of extra-articular prosthetic stabilization of the cranial cruciate ligament-deficient stifle. Vet Comp Orthop Traumatol 2011; 24: 167-177.
    Thieme ConnectPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 8 Warzee CC, Dejardin LM, Arnoczky SP. et al. Effect of tibial plateau leveling on cranial and caudal tibial thrusts in canine cranial cruciate-deficient stifles: an in vitro experimental study. Vet Surg 2001; 30: 278-286.
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 9 Montavon PM, Damur DM, Tepic S. editors. Advancement of the tibial tuberosity for the treatment of cranial cruciate deficient canine stifle. Proceedings of the 1st World Orthopedic Veterinary Congress. 2002. September 5-8 Munich, Germany:
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 10 Slocum B, Slocum TD. Tibial plateau leveling osteotomy for repair of cranial cruciate ligament rupture in the canine. Vet Clin North Am Small Anim Pract 1993; 23: 777-795.
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 11 Etchepareborde S, Barthelemy N, Mills J. et al. Mechanical testing of a modified stabilisation method for tibial tuberosity advancement. Vet Comp Orthop Traumatol 2010; 23: 400-405.
    Thieme ConnectPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 12 Etchepareborde S, Brunel L, Bollen G. et al. Preliminary experience of a modified Maquet technique for repair of cranial cruciate ligament rupture in dogs. Vet Comp Orthop Traumatol 2011; 24: 223-227.
    Thieme ConnectPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 13 Maquet P. Advancement of the tibial tuberosity. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1976; 225-230.
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 14 Etchepareborde S, Mills J, Busoni V. et al. Theoretical discrepancy between cage size and efficient tibial tuberosity advancement in dogs treated for cranial cruciate ligament rupture. Vet Comp Orthop Traumatol 2011; 24: 27-31.
    Thieme ConnectPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 15 Boudrieau RJ. Tibial plateau leveling osteotomy or tibial tuberosity advancement?. Vet Surg 2009; 38: 1-22.
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 16 Bush MA, Bowlt K, Gines JA. et al. Effect of use of different landmark methods on determining stifle angle and on calculated tibial tuberosity advancement. Vet Comp Orthop Traumatol 2011; 24: 205-210.
    Thieme ConnectPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 17 Hoffmann DE, Kowaleski MP, Johnson KA. et al. Ex vivo biomechanical evaluation of the canine cranial cruciate ligament-deficient stifle with varying angles of stifle joint flexion and axial loads after tibial tuberosity advancement. Vet Surg 2011; 40: 311-320.
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 18 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.
    Thieme ConnectPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 19 Burns CG, Boudrieau RJ. Modified tibial tuberosity advancement procedure with tuberosity advancement in excess of 12 mm in four large breed dogs with cranial cruciate ligament-deficient joints. Vet Comp Orthop Traumatol 2008; 21: 250-255.
    Thieme ConnectPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 20 Incavo S, Difazio F, Wilder D. et al. Longitudinal crack propagation in bone around femoral prosthesis. Clinical Orthop and Rel Res 1991; 272: 178-180.
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 21 Slocum B, Slocum D. Tibial tubercle recession for the caudal cruciate ligament-deficient stifle. In: Bojrab J. editor. Current Techniques in Small Animal Sugery. Baltimore: Williams Wilkins; 1998. pg. 1220-1222.
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 22 Shahar R, Banks-Sills L. A quasi-static three-dimensional, mathematical, three-body segment model of the canine knee. J Biomech 2004; 37: 1849-1859.
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 23 Bartel LB, Davy DT, Keaveny TM. Orthopaedic biomechanics: Mechanics and Design in Musculoskeletal Systems. New Jersey: Pearson Prentice Hall; 2006
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 24 Bartel LB, Dwight TD, Keaveny TM. Material properties of cortical bone. In: Orthopaedic Biomechanics: mechanics and design in musculoskeletal systems. Upper Saddle River: Pearson Prentice Hall; 2006
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 25 Brockstedt H, Kassem M, Eriksen EF. et al. Age- and sex-related changes in iliac cortical bone mass and remodeling. Bone 1993; 14: 681-691.
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 26 McCalden RW, McGeough JA, Barker MB. et al. Age-related changes in the tensile properties of cortical bone. The relative importance of changes in porosity, mineralization, and microstructure. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1993; 75: 1193-1205.
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar