Full text
| |
| Author(s): |
Sam Goldy Shoyama Oda
Total Authors: 1
|
| Document type: | Master's Dissertation |
| Press: | São Paulo. |
| Institution: | Universidade de São Paulo (USP). Faculdade de Medicina Veterinária e Zootecnia (FMVZ/SBD) |
| Defense date: | 2008-08-21 |
| Examining board members: |
Julia Maria Matera;
Roberto Freire da Mota e Albuquerque;
Sheila Canevese Rahal
|
| Advisor: | Julia Maria Matera |
| Abstract | |
Knee instability resulting from an insufficient cranial cruciate ligament is the major cause of hind limb lameness in dogs. This instability can result in osteoarthrosis and medial meniscal injury. Many surgical techniques have been developed to restore knee stability and to reduce degenerative joint desease. There is a similarly huge variability in materials utilized for different or the same techniques. An ideal technique and material arent established yet. This study analyzed the biomechanics of the lateral fabellar suture technique (SFTL) and the modified retinacular imbrication technique (SFTLM) in stabilizing cadaveric cranial cruciate ligament deficient stifles with 60 lb nylon leader line. Articular cranio-caudal stiffness and tibial translation were evaluated and compared between different techniques and with the intact knee. The statistical analysis revealed significant differences between all groups (intact cranial cruciate ligament (LCCr), ruptured cranial cruciate ligament (RLCCr), SFTL and SFTLM) in the cranial tibial translation. In the caudal tibial translation a significant statistical difference was seen between RLCCr and SFTLM groups and between reconstructed ones. Other differences were found in the cranial stiffness between LCCr, RLCCr and reconstructed groups, but not between SFTL and SFTLM. Both techniques tested reduced joint instability but SFTLM was more efficient, although it affected the caudal cruciate ligament biomechanics more evidently when compared with the SFTL technique. This long-term evaluation of the caudal influence induced by SFTLM will be important. Despite of the reduction in the tibial cranial translation by these two different extra capsular techniques, none have maintained normal stifle stiffness. (AU) | |