Evaluation of an intra-articular synthetic ligament for treatment of cranial cruciate ligament disease in dogs: a six-month prospective clinical trial

Matthew D. Barnhart; Karl Maritato; Kemal Schankereli; Harry Wotton; Steven Naber

doi:10.3415/VCOT-15-12-0206

Veterinary and Comparative Orthopaedics and Traumatology, Table of Contents

Vet Comp Orthop Traumatol 2016; 29(06): 491-498
DOI: 10.3415/VCOT-15-12-0206

Original Research

Schattauer GmbH

Evaluation of an intra-articular synthetic ligament for treatment of cranial cruciate ligament disease in dogs: a six-month prospective clinical trial

Authors

Matthew D. Barnhart

¹MedVet Medical and Cancer Centers, Worthington, OH, USA
Karl Maritato

²MedVet Medical and Cancer Centers, Cincinnati, OH, USA
Kemal Schankereli

³Avalon Medical, Stillwater, MN, USA
Harry Wotton

⁴Everost Inc., Sturbridge, MA, USA
Steven Naber

⁵The Ohio State University Department of Statistics, Columbus, OH, USA

Abstract

Summary

Objective: Evaluate the short-term outcomes of a novel synthetic ligament for treatment of naturally occurring canine cranial cruciate ligament disease.

Study design: Prospective clinical study.

Animals: Dogs with unilateral cranial cruciate ligament disease (n = 50).

Methods: Patient parameters evaluated included a five-point lameness score, evaluation of craniocaudal stifle instability, and radiographic findings over 24 weeks. Any postoperative complications were recorded.

Results: Thirty-four out of 42 dogs experienced significant improvements in lameness between the preoperative and 24 week time points. Lameness scores in those dogs improved significantly at all measured time intervals after postoperative week 2. Recurrence of stifle instability increased significantly over the study period from immediate postoperative measurements. Cranial drawer recurred in seven out of 42 of dogs by week 4 and 18/42 by week 24. Implant changes were not noted between the immediate and six-month postoperative radiographs except where complications occurred. Overall, 25 dogs experienced a total of 32 complications (22 major and 10 minor). Sixteen dogs had major complications, and nine had minor complications.

Conclusion: The procedure was generally effective at improving lameness scores, but did not consistently maintain postoperative stifle stability and had an unacceptably high complication rate. This synthetic ligament procedure cannot be recommended for use in its current form.

Supplementary Material to this article is available online at http://dx.doi.org/10.3415/VCOT-15-12-0206.

Keywords

Cranial cruciate ligament - synthetic ligament - intra-articular - ligament - canine - dog

Full Text

References

References
1 Johnson JA, Austin C, Breur GJ. Incidence of canine appendicular musculoskeletal disorders in 16 veterinary teaching hospitals from 1980 to 1989. Vet Comp Orthop Traumatol 1994; 7: 56-59.
2 Ekins AD, Pechman R, Kearney MT. et al. A retrospective study evaluating the degree of degenerative joint disease in the stifle joint of dogs following surgical repair of anterior cruciate ligament rupture. J Am Anim Hosp Assoc 1991; 27: 533.
3 Prodromos CC, Rogowksi J, Joyce BT. The economics of anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. In: Prodromos CC, editor. The Anterior Cruciate Ligament: Reconstruction and Basic Science. Philadelphia, PA: Saunders; 2008: 79-87.
4 Conzemius MG, Evans RB, Besancon MF. et al. Effect of surgical technique on limb function after surgery for rupture of the cranial cruciate ligament in dogs. J Am Vet Med Assoc 2005; 226: 232-236.
5 Vasseur PB, Rodrigo JJ, Stevenson S. et al. Replacement of the anterior cruciate ligament with a bone ligament bone anterior cruciate ligament allograft in dogs. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1987; 219: 268-277.
6 Lopez I M, Markel MD, Kalscheur V. et al. Hamstring graft technique for stabilization of canine cranial cruciate ligament deficient stifles. Vet Surg 2003; 32: 390-401.
7 Moore KW, Read RA. Cranial cruciate ligament rupture ion the dog a retrospective study comparing surgical techniques. Aust Vet J 1995; 27: 281-285.
8 Patterson RH, Smith GK, Gregor TP. et al. Biomechanical stability of four cranial cruciate ligament repair techniques in the dog. Vet Surg 1991; 20: 85-90.
9 Hulse DA, Butler DL, Kay MD. et al. Biomechanics of cranial cruciate ligament reconstruction in the dog- in vitro laxity testing. Vet Surg 1983; 12: 109-118.
10 Snow LA, White R, Gustafson S. et al. Ex vivo comparison of three surgical techniques to stabilize the canine cranial cruciate ligament deficient stifles. Vet Surg 2010; 39: 195-207.
11 Johnson RJ, Benynnon BD, Nicholes CE. et al. The treatment of injuries of the anterior cruciate ligament. J Bone Joint Surg 1992; 74A: 140-151.
12 Sachs RA, Daniel DM, Stone ML. et al. Patellofemoral problems after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Am J Sports Med 1989; 17: 760-765.
13 Amiel D, Kleiner JB, Roux RD. et al. The phenomenon of “ligamentization”: anterior ligament reconstruction with autogenous patellar tendon. J Orthop Res 1986; 4: 162-172.
14 Ng GY, Oakes BW, Deacon OW. et al. Long-term study of the biochemistry and biomechanics of anterior cruciate ligament-patellar tendon autografts in goats. J Orthop Res 1993; 14: 851-856.
15 Vassuer PB, Griffey S, Massat BJ. Evaluation of the Leeds-Keio synthetic replacement for the cranial cruciate ligament in dogs: an experimental study. Vet Comp Orthop Traumatol 1996; 29: 66-74.
16 Rooster HD, Vangheluwe L, Bree HV. et al. Biomechanical properties of braided polyester tapes intended for use as intra-articular cranial cruciate ligament prostheses in dogs. Am J Vet Res 2001; 62: 48-53.
17 Denny HR, Goodship AE. Replacement of the anterior cruciate ligament with carbon fibre in the dog. J Small Anim Pract 1980; 21: 279-286.
18 Johnson FL. Prosthetic anterior cruciate ligament. J Am Vet Med Assoc 1960; 137: 646-647.
19 Barrett GR, Line LL, Shelton WR. et al. The Dacron ligament prosthesis in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. A four year review. Am J Sports Med 1993; 21: 367-373.
20 Woods GA, Indelicato PA, Prevot TJ. The Gore-Tex anterior cruciate ligament prosthesis: two versus three year results. Am J Sports Med 1991; 19: 48-55.
21 Ventura A, Terzaghi C, Legnani C. Synthetic grafts for anterior cruciate ligament rupture: 19 year outcome study. The Knee 2010; 17: 108-113.
22 Huang JM, Wang Q, Shen F. et al. Cruciate ligament reconstruction using LARS artificial ligament under arthroscopy: 81 cases report. Chin Med J 2010; 123: 160-164.
23 Trieb K, Blahovec H, Brand H. et al. In vivo and in vitro cellular ingrowth into a new generation of artificial ligaments. Eur Surg Res 2004; 36: 148-151.
24 Cook JL, Evans R, Conzemius MG. et al. Proposed definitions and criteria for reporting time frame, outcome, and complications for clinical orthopedic studies in veterinary medicine. Vet Surg 2010; 39: 905-908.
25 Kock HJ, Sturmer R, Letsch R. et al. Interface and biocompatibility of polyethylene terephthalate knee ligament prostheses. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 1994; 114: 1-7.
26 Barnhart MD, Schankereli KM, Getzy D. et al. In vivo rodent cellular ingrowth into a polytetrafluoroethylene/high tenacity polyester artificial ligament implant. Poster session presented at the 2013 American College of Veterinary Surgeons Symposium 2013. October 24-26. San Antonio; Texas, USA:
27 Leung V, Yang H, Ko F. Nanofibers for ligament and tendon regeneration. In Blair E. editor Biomedical Textiles for Orthopaedic and Surgical Applications: Fundamentals, Applications and Tissue Engineering. Cambridge, UK: Woodhead Publishing; 2015: 91-112.
28 Dericks G. Ligament advanced reinforcement system anterior ligament reconstruction. Op Tech Sports Med 1995; 3: 187-305.
29 Guidon MF, Marois Y, Bejui J. et al. Analysis of retrieved polymer fiber based replacement for the ACL. Biomaterials, 2000; 21: 2461-2474.
30 Rodeo SA, Arnocsky SP, Torzilli PA. et al. Tendon-healing in a bone tunnel. A biomechanical and histological study in the dog. J Bone Joint Surg, 1993; 75A: 1795-1803.
31 Eagar P, Hull ML, Howell SM. How fixation method stiffness and initial tension affect anterior load-displacement of the knee and tension in anterior cruciate ligament grafts: a study in cadaveric knees using a double-loop hamstrings graft. J Orthop Res, 2004; 22: 613-624.
32 Budsberg SC, Verstraete MC, Soutas-Little RW. et al. Force plate analyses before and after stabilization of canine stifles for cruciate injury. Am J Vet Res, 1988; 49: 1522-1524.
33 Fitzpatrick N, Solano MA. Predictive variables for complications after TPLO with stifle inspection by arthrotomy in 1000 consecutive dogs. Vet Surg, 2010; 39: 460-474.
34 Stein S, Schmoekel H. Short-term and eight to 12 months results of a tibial tuberosity advancement as a treatment of canine cruciate ligament damage. J Small Anim Pract, 2008; 49: 398-404.
35 Casale SA, McCarthy RJ. Complications associated with lateral fabellotibial suture surgery for cranial cruciate ligament injury in dogs: 363 cases (1997-2005). J Amer Vet Med Assoc, 2009; 234: 229-235.
36 Boekhout C, Cross A. Incidence of transcortical tibial Fractures with self-tapping and non-self-tapping screws in a canine TPLO model. Vet Surg, 2012; 41: 898-901.

Supplementary Material

Online Supplementary Material (PDF) (PDF) (opens in new window)