Vet Comp Orthop Traumatol 2016; 29(06): 522-527
DOI: 10.3415/VCOT-16-01-0014
Clinical Communication
Schattauer GmbH

Clinical evaluation of a mini locking plate system for fracture repair of the radius and ulna in miniature breed dogs

Byung-Jae Kang
1   College of Veterinary Medicine and Institute of Veterinary Science, Kangwon National University, Chuncheon, Korea
,
Hak-Hyun Ryu
2   Irion Animal Hospital, Seongnam, Korea
,
Sungsu Park
3   Seojeong Animal Medical Center, Uijeongbu, Korea
,
Yongsun Kim
4   Department of Clinical Sciences, College of Veterinary Medicine, Seoul National University, Seoul, Korea
,
Oh-Kyeong Kweon
4   Department of Clinical Sciences, College of Veterinary Medicine, Seoul National University, Seoul, Korea
,
Kei Hayashi
5   College of Veterinary Medicine, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, USA
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

Received: 22 January 2016

Accepted: 22 July 2016

Publication Date:
19 December 2017 (online)

Summary

Objectives: To retrospectively evaluate the effectiveness of a novel 1.2 mm mini locking plate system in treating fractures of the radius and ulna in miniature breed dogs.

Methods: Medical records and radiographs of miniature breed dogs with fractures treated with a 1.2 mm mini locking plate system were reviewed. The inclusion criteria were: body weight of 2.5 kg or less, trans-verse or short oblique fracture of the radius and ulna, and treatment with a mini locking plate system as the sole method of fixation. For each patient, data including signalment, time to radiographic union, use of bone graft or other agents, and previous repair attempts were recorded. The outcome and complications were determined from clinical and radiographic follow-up examinations.

Results: Fourteen cases with a mean radial width of 4.5 mm (± 0.8 mm) were included into this study. The fractures healed without failure of fixation in all cases. Mean time to adequate radiographic union was 8.4 weeks (± 2.6 weeks). Major complications were not seen in any of the cases, and minor complications occurred in three of the cases. Limb function was graded as ‘normal’ in 10 cases and ‘occasional lameness’ in four cases.

Clinical significance: The mini locking system evaluated in this study was an effective treatment method for radial and ulnar fractures in miniature breed dogs with a radial width smaller than 5.5 mm.

Supplementary Material to this article is available online at http://dx.doi.org/10.3415/VCOT-16-01-0014.

 
  • References

  • 1 Piras L, Cappellari F, Peirone B. et al. Treatment of fractures of the distal radius and ulna in toy breed dogs with circular external skeletal fixation: a retrospective study. Vet Comp Orthop Traumatol 2011; 24: 228-235.
  • 2 Hamilton MH, Langley Hobbs SJ. Use of the AO veterinary mini ‘T’-plate for stabilisation of distal radius and ulna fractures in toy breed dogs. Vet Comp Orthop Traumatol 2005; 18: 18-25.
  • 3 Larsen LJ, Roush JK, McLaughlin RM. Bone plate fixation of distal radius and ulna fractures in small-and miniature-breed dogs. J Am Anim Hosp Assoc 1999; 35: 243-250.
  • 4 Phillips I. A survey of bone fractures in the dog and cat. J Small Anim Pract 1979; 20: 661-674.
  • 5 Lappin MR, Aron DN, Herron HL. Fractures of the radius and ulna in the dog. J Am Anim Hosp Assoc 1983; 19: 643-650.
  • 6 Sumner-Smith G. A comparative investigation into the healing of fractures in miniature poodles and mongrel dogs. J Small Anim Pract 1974; 15: 323-328.
  • 7 Eger C. A technique for the management of radial and ulnar fractures in miniature dogs using translation pins. J Small Anim Pract 1990; 31: 377-381.
  • 8 Welch JA, Boudrieau RJ, Déjardin LM. et al. The intraosseous blood supply of the canine radius: implications for healing of distal fractures in small dogs. Vet Surg 1997; 26: 57-61.
  • 9 Johnson AL, Kneller SK, Weigel RM. Radial and tibial fracture repair with external skeletal fixation: effects of fracture type, reduction, and complications on healing. Vet Surg 1989; 18: 367-372.
  • 10 Waters DJ, Breur GJ, Toombs JP. Treatment of common forelimb fractures in miniature-and toy-breed dogs. J Am Anim Hosp Assoc 1983; 19: 643-650.
  • 11 Decamp CE, Johnston SA, Déjardin LM. et al. Fractures: classification, diagnosis, and treatment. In: Brinker, Piermattei, and Flo’s Handbook of Small Animal Orthopedics and Fracture Repair. 5th ed. St. Louis: Elsevier Saunders 2016; 120-121.
  • 12 Larson AN, Rizzo M. Locking plate technology and its applications in upper extremity fracture care. Hand Clin 2007; 23: 269-278.
  • 13 Nicetto T, Petazzoni M, Urizzi A. et al. Experiences using the Fixin locking plate system for the stabilization of appendicular fractures in dogs: a clinical and radiographic retrospective assessment. Vet Comp Orthop Traumatol 2012; 26: 61-68.
  • 14 Wagner M. General principles for the clinical use of the LCP. Injury 2003; 34: 31-42.
  • 15 Barnhart MD, Rides CF, Kennedy SC. et al. Fracture repair using a polyaxial locking plate system (PAX). Vet Surg 2013; 42: 60-66.
  • 16 Keller M, Voss K, Montavon P. The ComPact UniLock 2.0/2.4 system and its clinical application in small animal orthopedics. Vet Comp Orthop Traumatol 2005; 18: 83-93.
  • 17 Haaland PJ, Sjostrom L, Devor M. et al. Appendicular fracture repair in dogs using the locking compression plate system: 47 cases. Vet Comp Orthop Traumatol 2009; 22: 309-315.
  • 18 Johnson KA. Piermattei’s Atlas of Surgical Approaches to the Bones and Joints of the Dog and Cat. 5th edition. St.. Lousi, Missouri: Elsevier Saunders; 2014
  • 19 Voss K, Kull M, Hässig M. et al. Repair of long-bone fractures in cats and small dogs with the Unilock mandible locking plate system. Vet Comp Orthop Traumatol 2009; 22: 398-405.
  • 20 Gibert S, Ragetly GR, Boudrieau RJ. Locking compression plate stabilization of 20 distal radial and ulnar fractures in toy and miniature breed dogs. Vet Comp Orthop Traumatol 2015; 28: 441-447.
  • 21 Staller GS, Richardson DW, Nunamaker DM. et al. Contact area and static pressure profile at the bone-plate interface in the non-luted and luted bone plate. Vet Surg 1995; 24: 299-307.