Download PDF
Vet Comp Orthop Traumatol 2024; 37(04): 196-205
DOI: 10.1055/s-0044-1779711
Original Research

Effect of Medial Opening Wedge and External Rotational Humeral Osteotomies on Medial Elbow Compartment Pressure: An Ex Vivo Study

Ed Crystal
1   Small Animal Teaching Hospital, Institute of Veterinary Science, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, United Kingdom
2   Northwest Veterinary Specialists, Delamere House, Sutton Weaver, United Kingdom
,
Alice Brettle
3   Fusion Implants, Harrison Hughes Building of Engineering, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, United Kingdom
,
Thomas W. Maddox
1   Small Animal Teaching Hospital, Institute of Veterinary Science, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, United Kingdom
4   Department of Musculoskeletal and Ageing Sciences, Institute of Life Course and Medical Sciences, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, United Kingdom
,
Dan Jones
3   Fusion Implants, Harrison Hughes Building of Engineering, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, United Kingdom
,
Myles Benjamin Walton
3   Fusion Implants, Harrison Hughes Building of Engineering, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, United Kingdom
5   Movement Referrals, 3 Abbots Park, Preston Brook, Runcorn, United Kingdom
› Author Affiliations Funding This study was funded by Fusion Implants, United Kingdom.
› Further Information
Also available at
   Permissions and Reprints

Corrected by:

Erratum: Effect of Medial Opening Wedge and External Rotational Humeral Osteotomies on Medial Elbow Compartment Pressure: An Ex Vivo StudyVet Comp Orthop Traumatol eFirst
DOI: 10.1055/s-0044-1786748

Abstract

Objective The aim of this study was to assess if the level of osteotomy (50 or 75% the length of the humerus), osteotomy angle (5, 10, or 20 degrees), direction of bone alteration (external rotational or medial opening wedge osteotomies), or orientation of osteotomy (perpendicular to the humeral long axis or perpendicular to the weight-bearing axis of the limb) affect pressure through the medial compartment of the elbow.

Study Design Humeral osteotomies were performed at 50 and 75% the length of the humerus on 12 canine cadaver thoracic limbs and patient-specific three-dimensional (3D) printed plates applied to induce the desired alteration. Sensors were placed into the medial and lateral aspects of the elbow joint and the limb compressed to 90 N in a universal testing system.

Results Increasing the angle of the induced change had a significant effect on the decreased load through the medial compartment. Performing the osteotomy at 75% of humeral length from proximal was significantly more effective at reducing the medial elbow load than performing it at 50%. Opening wedge osteotomies were more effective than external rotational osteotomies, but both were effective. Changing the direction of the osteotomy (comparing transverse to oblique) did not significantly affect the load reduction through the medial compartment.

Conclusion Performing an osteotomy at a more distal location along the humerus and increasing the angle of the induced change increased the effectiveness of load-shifting humeral osteotomies.

Keywords

elbow dysplasia - medial compartment disease - humeral osteotomy - load-shifting - canine

Authors' Contribution

E.C. contributed to the study design, acquisition of data, data analysis and interpretation, and writing of the initial manuscript. A.B. contributed to conception of the study, study design, acquisition of data, and data analysis and interpretation. T.W.M. contributed to data analysis and interpretation. D.J. contributed to conception of the study, study design, and data analysis and interpretation. M.B.W. contributed to conception of the study, study design, and data analysis and interpretation. All the authors revised and approved the manuscript before submitting.




Publication History

Received: 11 April 2023

Accepted: 12 January 2024

Article published online:
23 February 2024

© 2024. Thieme. All rights reserved.

Georg Thieme Verlag KG
Rüdigerstraße 14, 70469 Stuttgart, Germany

 

  • References

  • 1 Fitzpatrick N, Yeadon R. Working algorithm for treatment decision making for developmental disease of the medial compartment of the elbow in dogs. Vet Surg 2009; 38 (02) 285-300
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Mason DR, Schulz KS, Fujita Y, Kass PH, Stover SM. Measurement of humeroradial and humeroulnar transarticular joint forces in the canine elbow joint after humeral wedge and humeral slide osteotomies. Vet Surg 2008; 37 (01) 63-70
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Gutbrod A, Guerrero TG. Effect of external rotational humeral osteotomy on the contact mechanics of the canine elbow joint. Vet Surg 2012; 41 (07) 845-852
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Mina C, Garrett Jr WE, Pietrobon R, Glisson R, Higgins L. High tibial osteotomy for unloading osteochondral defects in the medial compartment of the knee. Am J Sports Med 2008; 36 (05) 949-955
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Cao Z, Mai X, Wang J, Feng E, Huang Y. Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty vs high tibial osteotomy for knee osteoarthritis: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Arthroplasty 2018; 33 (03) 952-959
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Fujita Y, Schulz KS, Mason DR, Kass PH, Stover SM. Effect of humeral osteotomy on joint surface contact in canine elbow joints. Am J Vet Res 2003; 64 (04) 506-511
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Breiteneicher AH, Norby B, Schulz KS. et al. The effect of sliding humeral osteotomy (SHO) on frontal plane thoracic limb alignment: an ex vivo canine cadaveric study. Vet Surg 2016; 45 (08) 1095-1107
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Fitzpatrick N, Yeadon R, Smith T, Schulz K. Techniques of application and initial clinical experience with sliding humeral osteotomy for treatment of medial compartment disease of the canine elbow. Vet Surg 2009; 38 (02) 261-278
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Brettle A, Garcia-Tunon E, Bates K. et al. Load-Shifting Osteotomies for Medial Compartment Disease of the Canine Elbow: Establishing a Geometric Model. Paper presented at: BVOA Spring Meeting; April 4, 2018; Birmingham, UK
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Brettle A, Crystal E, Geraghty B. et al. Biomechanical Testing of Load Shifting Osteotomies for the Treatment of Medial Compartment Disease. Paper presented at: BVOA Spring Meeting; March 23; 2022; Manchester, UK
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 LaFond E, Breur GJ, Austin CC. Breed susceptibility for developmental orthopedic diseases in dogs. J Am Anim Hosp Assoc 2002; 38 (05) 467-477
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Cuddy LC, Lewis DD, Kim SE. et al. Ex vivo contact mechanics and three-dimensional alignment of normal dog elbows after proximal ulnar rotational osteotomy. Vet Surg 2012; 41 (08) 905-914
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Sutton PM, Holloway ES. The young osteoarthritic knee: dilemmas in management. BMC Med 2013; 11: 14
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Sun H, Zhou L, Li F, Duan J. Comparison between closing-wedge and opening-wedge high tibial osteotomy in patients with medial knee osteoarthritis: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Knee Surg 2017; 30 (02) 158-165
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Agarwala S, Sobti A, Naik S, Chaudhari S. Comparison of closing-wedge and opening-wedge high tibial osteotomies for medial compartment osteoarthritis of knee in Asian population: mid-term follow-up. J Clin Orthop Trauma 2016; 7 (04) 272-275
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Duivenvoorden T, Brouwer RW, Baan A. et al. Comparison of closing-wedge and opening-wedge high tibial osteotomy for medial compartment osteoarthritis of the knee: a randomized controlled trial with a six-year follow-up. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2014; 96 (17) 1425-1432
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Duivenvoorden T, van Diggele P, Reijman M. et al. Adverse events and survival after closing- and opening-wedge high tibial osteotomy: a comparative study of 412 patients. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2017; 25 (03) 895-901
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Wu L, Lin J, Jin Z, Cai X, Gao W. Comparison of clinical and radiological outcomes between opening-wedge and closing-wedge high tibial osteotomy: a comprehensive meta-analysis. PLoS One 2017; 12 (02) e0171700
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Kim JH, Kim HJ, Lee DH. Survival of opening versus closing wedge high tibial osteotomy: A meta-analysis. Sci Rep 2017; 7 (01) 7296
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Takeuchi R, Umemoto Y, Aratake M. et al. A mid term comparison of open wedge high tibial osteotomy vs unicompartmental knee arthroplasty for medial compartment osteoarthritis of the knee. J Orthop Surg Res 2010; 5 (01) 65
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Dettoni F, Bonasia DE, Castoldi F, Bruzzone M, Blonna D, Rossi R. High tibial osteotomy versus unicompartmental knee arthroplasty for medial compartment arthrosis of the knee: a review of the literature. Iowa Orthop J 2010; 30: 131-140
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Hoorntje A, Witjes S, Kuijer PPFM. et al. High rates of return to sports activities and work after osteotomies around the knee: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Sports Med 2017; 47 (11) 2219-2244
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Parker DA, Beatty KT, Giuffre B, Scholes CJ, Coolican MR. Articular cartilage changes in patients with osteoarthritis after osteotomy. Am J Sports Med 2011; 39 (05) 1039-1045
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 van der Woude JAD, Wiegant K, van Heerwaarden RJ. et al. Knee joint distraction compared with high tibial osteotomy: a randomized controlled trial. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2017; 25 (03) 876-886
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Inoue S, Otsuka H, Takito J, Nakamura M. Decisive differences in the bone repair processes of the metaphysis and diaphysis in young mice. Bone Rep 2017; 8: 1-8
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Wendelburg KM, Beale BS. Medium and long term evaluation of sliding humeral osteotomy in dogs. Vet Surg 2014; 43 (07) 804-813
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Fitzpatrick N, Bertran J, Solano MA. Sliding humeral osteotomy: medium-term objective outcome measures and reduction of complications with a modified technique. Vet Surg 2015; 44 (02) 137-149
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 McConkey MJ, Valenzano DM, Wei A. et al. Effect of the proximal abducting ulnar osteotomy on intra-articular pressure distribution and contact mechanics of congruent and incongruent canine elbows ex vivo . Vet Surg 2016; 45 (03) 347-355
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Amadio A, Corriveau KM, Norby B, Stephenson TR, Saunders WB. Effect of proximal abducting ulnar osteotomy (PAUL) on frontal plane thoracic limb alignment: an ex vivo canine study. Vet Surg 2020; 49 (07) 1437-1448
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Coghill FJ, Ho-Eckart LK, Baltzer WI. Mid- to long-term outcome after arthroscopy and proximal abducting ulnar osteotomy versus arthroscopy alone in dogs with medial compartment disease: thirty cases. Vet Comp Orthop Traumatol 2021; 34 (02) 85-90
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 31 Danielski A, Krekis A, Yeadon R. et al. Complications after proximal abducting ulnar osteotomy and prognostic factors in 66 dogs. Vet Surg 2022; 51 (01) 136-147
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 32 Garofolo SQ, Conzemius MG. Articulated joint distraction in a cadaveric model of the canine elbow. Vet Comp Orthop Traumatol 2019; 32 (05) 362-368
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar