Arthroscopy and arthrotomy were equally effective for medial meniscal release but arthroscopy was minimally advantageous at preventing iatrogenic damage to the caudal cruciate ligament: a canine cadaveric study.
Dana N Gale, Steven W Frederick, Bianca F Hettlich, Jennifer J Au, Tatiana Motta
{"title":"Arthroscopy and arthrotomy were equally effective for medial meniscal release but arthroscopy was minimally advantageous at preventing iatrogenic damage to the caudal cruciate ligament: a canine cadaveric study.","authors":"Dana N Gale, Steven W Frederick, Bianca F Hettlich, Jennifer J Au, Tatiana Motta","doi":"10.3389/fvets.2025.1452969","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To compare efficacy of four techniques used for medial meniscal release by medial caudal meniscotibial ligament transection and evaluate associated iatrogenic damage to the medial meniscus, caudal cruciate ligament (CdCL), and articular cartilage of the canine stifle joint.</p><p><strong>Study design: </strong>Twenty-four pairs of canine cadaveric pelvic limbs were randomly assigned to groups by methods of approach, cranial tibial translation, and meniscal release. I: arthrotomy, Hohmann, #11 scalpel blade; II: arthrotomy, Hohmann, #64 Beaver blade; III: arthroscopy, Hohmann, meniscal hook knife; IV: arthroscopy, no joint translation, meniscal hook knife. Post-procedure stifle dissection and evaluation of meniscal release success rate and presence of iatrogenic damage were performed. Fisher's exact tests were performed for meniscal release and damage comparisons. Iatrogenic damage to the CdCL and articular cartilage were compared using generalized linear mixed effects model and linear mixed effects models (G/LMM) respectively.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Incomplete meniscal release was identified in 0/12 (0%) stifles in group I, 1/12 (8.3%) stifles in group II, 2/12 (16.7%) stifles in group III, and 1/12 (8.3%) stifles in group IV (<i>p</i> = 0.89, Fisher's exact test). There was no difference in iatrogenic meniscal damage rates between groups (<i>p</i> = 0.48, Fisher's exact test). There were no differences in total surface area of iatrogenic articular cartilage damage in any tested region between groups: femoral trochlea (<i>p</i> = 0.32, LMM), femoral condyles (<i>p</i> = 0.54, LMM), tibia (<i>p</i> = 0.28, LMM). Group I had more iatrogenic damage to the CdCL than group IV (<i>p</i> = 0.04, GLMM); no other differences were found.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Arthroscopy and arthrotomy were equally effective for performing medial meniscal release by transection of the medial caudal meniscotibial ligament. Arthroscopic evaluation and medial meniscal release without joint translation was minimally advantageous in preventing iatrogenic damage to the CdCL.</p>","PeriodicalId":12772,"journal":{"name":"Frontiers in Veterinary Science","volume":"12 ","pages":"1452969"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11865911/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Frontiers in Veterinary Science","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3389/fvets.2025.1452969","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"VETERINARY SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Objective: To compare efficacy of four techniques used for medial meniscal release by medial caudal meniscotibial ligament transection and evaluate associated iatrogenic damage to the medial meniscus, caudal cruciate ligament (CdCL), and articular cartilage of the canine stifle joint.
Study design: Twenty-four pairs of canine cadaveric pelvic limbs were randomly assigned to groups by methods of approach, cranial tibial translation, and meniscal release. I: arthrotomy, Hohmann, #11 scalpel blade; II: arthrotomy, Hohmann, #64 Beaver blade; III: arthroscopy, Hohmann, meniscal hook knife; IV: arthroscopy, no joint translation, meniscal hook knife. Post-procedure stifle dissection and evaluation of meniscal release success rate and presence of iatrogenic damage were performed. Fisher's exact tests were performed for meniscal release and damage comparisons. Iatrogenic damage to the CdCL and articular cartilage were compared using generalized linear mixed effects model and linear mixed effects models (G/LMM) respectively.
Results: Incomplete meniscal release was identified in 0/12 (0%) stifles in group I, 1/12 (8.3%) stifles in group II, 2/12 (16.7%) stifles in group III, and 1/12 (8.3%) stifles in group IV (p = 0.89, Fisher's exact test). There was no difference in iatrogenic meniscal damage rates between groups (p = 0.48, Fisher's exact test). There were no differences in total surface area of iatrogenic articular cartilage damage in any tested region between groups: femoral trochlea (p = 0.32, LMM), femoral condyles (p = 0.54, LMM), tibia (p = 0.28, LMM). Group I had more iatrogenic damage to the CdCL than group IV (p = 0.04, GLMM); no other differences were found.
Conclusion: Arthroscopy and arthrotomy were equally effective for performing medial meniscal release by transection of the medial caudal meniscotibial ligament. Arthroscopic evaluation and medial meniscal release without joint translation was minimally advantageous in preventing iatrogenic damage to the CdCL.
期刊介绍:
Frontiers in Veterinary Science is a global, peer-reviewed, Open Access journal that bridges animal and human health, brings a comparative approach to medical and surgical challenges, and advances innovative biotechnology and therapy.
Veterinary research today is interdisciplinary, collaborative, and socially relevant, transforming how we understand and investigate animal health and disease. Fundamental research in emerging infectious diseases, predictive genomics, stem cell therapy, and translational modelling is grounded within the integrative social context of public and environmental health, wildlife conservation, novel biomarkers, societal well-being, and cutting-edge clinical practice and specialization. Frontiers in Veterinary Science brings a 21st-century approach—networked, collaborative, and Open Access—to communicate this progress and innovation to both the specialist and to the wider audience of readers in the field.
Frontiers in Veterinary Science publishes articles on outstanding discoveries across a wide spectrum of translational, foundational, and clinical research. The journal''s mission is to bring all relevant veterinary sciences together on a single platform with the goal of improving animal and human health.