Download PDF
Vet Comp Orthop Traumatol 2019; 32(05): 408-419
DOI: 10.1055/s-0039-1691818
Clinical Communication
Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York

Long Bone Fractures in Impala (Aepyceros melampus): A Classification System and Review of 55 Cases

Frans G. van Heerden
1   Department of Companion Animal Clinical Studies, Faculty of Veterinary Science, University of Pretoria, Pretoria, South Africa
,
Robert M. Kirberger
1   Department of Companion Animal Clinical Studies, Faculty of Veterinary Science, University of Pretoria, Pretoria, South Africa
,
Marthinus J. Hartman
1   Department of Companion Animal Clinical Studies, Faculty of Veterinary Science, University of Pretoria, Pretoria, South Africa
› Author Affiliations Funding This project was funded by the Department of Companion Animal Clinical Studies, Faculty of Veterinary Science, University of Pretoria, South Africa.
Further Information

Publication History

03 August 2018

04 April 2019

Publication Date:
03 June 2019 (online)

    Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Objective The purpose of this study was to introduce a modified-Unger fracture classification in impala and report the findings of 58 long bone fractures classified according to this system.

Methods This was a retrospective radiographical study evaluating 122 radiographs of 58 long bone fractures in 55 impala. The Unger fracture classification was modified and fracture illustrations for the metacarpal and metatarsal bones added. Each fracture was classified and assigned a four symbol α-numeric code using our classification. The patient signalment, skeletal maturity, fracture-associated soft tissue changes, presence of fissure lines, periosteal reaction and cause of the fracture were recorded.

Results The overall fracture distribution based on location, found tibial (n = 17) fractures to be the most common fractured long bone. When combined, the majority of fractures involved the metacarpal and metatarsal bones (n = 23). Forty five of 58 fractures occurred in the diaphyseal bone segment. In all long bones, the distribution based on complexity was simple (n = 27), wedge (n = 16) and multi-fragmentary (n = 15) fractures. Thirty one of 58 fractures were open and fissure lines were detected in 20 of 58 fractures.

Clinical Significance Our modified-Unger fracture classification was applicable in classifying 58 impala long bone fractures. This classification should provide the basis for further advances in veterinary and comparative ungulates, and particularly the antelopes, orthopaedics and traumatology.

Keywords

fracture classification - fracture distribution - long bone fracture - impala - ungulate

Author contributions

All authors contributed to conception of study, study design, acquisition of data and data analysis and interpretation. All authors also drafted, revised and approved the submitted manuscript.


 

  • References

  • 1 Zeiler GE, Stegmann GF, Fosgate G. , et al. Etorphine-ketamine-medetomidine total intravenous anesthesia in wild impala (Aepyceros melampus) of 120-minute duration. J Zoo Wildl Med 2015; 46 (04) 755-766
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Unger M, Montavon PM, Heim UFA. Classification of fractures of long bones in the dog and cat: introduction and clinical application. Vet Comp Orthop Traumatol 1990; 3: 41-50
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Müller ME, Nazarian S, Koch P. The Comprehensive Classification of Fractures of Long Bones. New York: Springer Verlag; 1990: 1-191
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Miller CW, Sumner-Smith G, Sheridan C, Pennock PW. Using the Unger system to classify 386 long bone fractures in dogs. J Small Anim Pract 1998; 39 (08) 390-393
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Zaal MD, Hazewinkel HA. Classification of 202 tibial fractures in cats and dogs. Vet Surg 1996; 25: 271-271
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Meyer-Lindenberg A, Ebel H, Fehr M. Fractures of the distal humerus - experiences with fracture classification according to Unger et al. Eur J Companion Anim Pract 1993; 3: 19-30
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Dee JF, Dee J, Piermattei DL. Classification, management, and repair of central tarsal fractures in the racing greyhound. J Am Anim Hosp Assoc 1976; 12: 398-405
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Johnson KA. Accessory carpal bone fractures in the racing greyhound. Classification and pathology. Vet Surg 1987; 16 (01) 60-64
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Prieur WD, Braden TD, von Rechenberg B. A suggested fracture classification of adult small animal fractures. Vet Comp Orthop Traumatol 1990; 4: 111-116
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Tillson DM. Open fracture management. Vet Clin North Am Small Anim Pract 1995; 25 (05) 1093-1110
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Anderson A, Coughlan AR. Sacral fractures in dogs and cats: a classification scheme and review of 51 cases. J Small Anim Pract 1997; 38 (09) 404-409
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Cook JL, Cook CR, Tomlinson JL. , et al. Scapular fractures in dogs: epidemiology, classification, and concurrent injuries in 105 cases (1988-1994). J Am Anim Hosp Assoc 1997; 33 (06) 528-532
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Messmer M, Montavon PM. Pelvic fractures in the dog and cat: a classification system and review of 556 cases. Vet Comp Orthop Traumatol 2004; 17: 167-183
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Berzon JL. The classification and management of epiphyseal plate fractures. J Am Anim Hosp Assoc 1980; 16: 651-658
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Marretta SM, Schrader SC. Physeal injuries in the dog: a review of 135 cases. J Am Vet Med Assoc 1983; 182 (07) 708-710
    Google Scholar
  • 16 Embertson RM, Bramlage LR, Gabel AA. Physeal fractures in the horse - I. classification and incidence. Vet Surg 1986; 15: 223-229
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Fackelman GE, Peutz IP, Norris JC, Auer JA, von Rechenberg B. The development of an equine fracture documentation system. Vet Comp Orthop Traumatol 1993; 6: 47-52
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Schneider RK, Bramlage LR, Gabel AA, Barone LM, Kantrowitz BM. Incidence, location and classification of 371 third carpal bone fractures in 313 horses. Equine Vet J Suppl 1988; 6 (06) 33-42
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Denny HR, Barr AR, Waterman A. Surgical treatment of fractures of the olecranon in the horse: a comparative review of 25 cases. Equine Vet J 1987; 19 (04) 319-325
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Honnas CM, O'Brien TR, Linford LL. Solar margin fractures of the equine distal phalanx. Proceedings American Association of Equine Practitioners 1987; 33: 399-410
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Struchen C. Use of 3 fracture classification systems for evaluation of fractures of long bones in horses. Schweiz Arch Tierheilkd 1993; 135: 184-185
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Kellam JF, Meinberg EG, Agel J, Karam MD, Roberts CS. Introduction: fracture and dislocation classification compendium-2018: international comprehensive classification of fractures and dislocations committee. J Orthop Trauma 2018; 32: S1-S10
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Heim UF. Defining the boundary between diaphysis and metaphysis using quadrant measurement. A contribution to the classification and documentation of fractures of long tubular bones exemplified by the distal tibia [ ]. Unfallchirurg 1987; 90 (06) 274-280
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Chao P, Lewis DD, Kowaleski MP, Pozzi A. Biomechanical concepts applicable to minimally invasive fracture repair in small animals. Vet Clin North Am Small Anim Pract 2012; 42 (05) 853-872 , v
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Newman KD, Anderson DE. Fracture management in alpacas and llamas. Vet Clin North Am Food Anim Pract 2009; 25 (02) 507-522
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Brounts SH, Racette M, Muir P. Comparison of fixation methods for treatment of long bone fractures in llamas and alpacas. Vet Surg 2011; 40 (01) 115-119
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Mohamed AF. Fractures in single-humped camels: a retrospective study of 220 cases (2008–2009). J King Abdulaziz Univ 2012; 23: 3-17
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Ahmed AF, Al-Sobayil FA. Fractures in young, single-humped camels (Camelus dromedarius). Turk J Vet Anim Sci 2012; 36: 1-8
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Dass L, Sahay P, Khan A, Deokioliyr U, Ehsan M. Incidence of fractures in goats in the hilly terrain of Chhotanagpur. Indian Vet J 1985; 62: 766-768
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Singh AP, Mirakhur KK, Nigam JM. A study on the incidence and anatomical locations of fractures in canine, caprine, bovine, equine and camel. Indian J Vet Surg 1983; 4: 61-66
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 31 Anderson DE, St Jean G. Management of fractures in field settings. Vet Clin North Am Food Anim Pract 2008; 24 (03) 567-582 , viii
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 32 Radasch RM. Biomechanics of bone and fractures. Vet Clin North Am Small Anim Pract 1999; 29 (05) 1045-1082 , v–vi
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 33 Cross AR. Fracture biology and biomechanics. In: Tobias KM, Johnston SA. , eds. Veterinary Surgery Small Animal. St. Louis, MO: Elsevier Saunders; 2012: 565-566
    Google Scholar