Objective To compare the quality of visualization of canine carpal ligaments by using computed tomography (CT), MRI, CT arthrography (CTA), and magnetic resonance arthrography (MRA). Study design Prospective descriptive study. Study population Cadavers from dogs weighing more than 20 kg. Methods A 16‐slice CT scanner and a 3 Tesla MRI were used for the investigation. A dilute contrast medium was injected into the middle carpal and radiocarpal joints under fluoroscopic control, and CTA and MRA images were acquired. To evaluate the difference between imaging modalities, 3 observers graded carpal ligaments of clinical interest using a scale from 0 to 4 for their quality of visualization. Data were analyzed by using a random‐effect ordinal logistic regression with Bonferroni adjustment. The interobserver agreement was calculated by using the weighted Cohen's κ. Results Normal carpal joints (n = 9) were investigated. Magnetic resonance arthrography improved visualization of the majority of carpal ligaments compared with MRI (P < .05) and offered the best visualization overall. Magnetic resonance imaging and MRA offered better visualization compared with both CT and CTA (P < .05). There was no difference between CT and CTA. Interobserver agreement was discrete (0.2 < κ ≤ 0.4) for all observers. Conclusion Arthrography improved the capabilities of MRI but not of CT for visualization of the canine carpal ligaments. Magnetic resonance arthrography was particularly useful for evaluation of the stabilizers of the antebrachiocarpal joint. Clinical significance 3 Tesla MRA and MRI allow excellent visualization of the ligamentous morphology and may be helpful in the diagnostic process of carpal sprains in dogs.

Objective: To summarize and discuss peer-reviewed studies on minimally invasive osteosynthesis (MIO) of long bone, physeal, and articular fractures in dogs and cats. Study Design: Invited review.Methods: A critique of literature was performed to assess MIO feasibility, outcomes, and complications through PubMed, Scopus, and CAB abstracts research databases .Results: More than 40 MIO articles have been published in the last 15 years, but most studies had small numbers, lacked control groups, and used limited outcome measures. Studies generally showed that MIO was feasible in dogs and cats with low complication rates. The current evidence does not demonstrate superior bone healing or functional outcomes with MIO when compared to standard methods. Although treatment principles, case selection, and techniques varied depending on the anatomical location, there were no salient differences in complication rates among long bones, physeal, and articular fractures treated by MIO. Conclusion:The current available evidence and the personal experience of the authors support MIO as a promising fracture management modality.MIO can yield excellent outcomes when applied in carefully selected cases, performed by surgeons experienced in the technique. We cannot, however, conclude that MIO is superior to open fracture stabilization based on the available evidence in veterinary literature. Randomized controlled studies are warranted to prospectively compare MIO with other osteosynthesis techniques and thereby validate its role in fracture management for dogs and cats.

Objective To describe the application of a custom acetabular prosthesis (CAP) for total hip replacement (THR) in a dog 20 months after femoral head and neck ostectomy (FHNO). Study design Case report. Animal A 10‐year‐old, male, castrated, Labrador retriever with progressive lameness and pain after FHNO. Methods Acetabular bone stock was assessed as insufficient for conventional THR, so a biflanged CAP was designed and three‐dimensionally printed in titanium to bridge the bone defect. The CAP had a porous surface for long‐term biologic fixation on the backside and was anchored to the ilium and ischium with screws. A polyethylene cup was cemented into the CAP, and a bolted cementless femoral stem was inserted. Results The loss of the conventional anatomic landmarks complicated intraoperative orientation and led to eccentric reaming and 5‐mm malalignment of the CAP. Reduction of the prosthetic joint was difficult because of periarticular fibrosis, loss of functional muscle length, and thickness of the CAP, and intraoperative shortening of the stem neck was required. Postoperative complications included sciatic neurapraxia, which resolved with time and conservative management. Absence of pain and improvement of range of motion were observed at clinical examination 12 months after surgery; however, moderate hind limb lameness persisted due to muscle tension. No evidence of implant loosening was noted on radiographs acquired 24 months after surgery. Conclusion Femoral head and neck ostectomy with poor functional outcome was ameliorated by using a CAP in this dog. Clinical significance Use of a CAP can be considered to treat acetabular defects in dogs.

No abstract

No abstract