Facebook femoral head and neck ostectomy Archives - Animal Medical Center of Southern California

Total Hip Replacement

The most frequent reason for performing a total hip replacement (THR) is relief of pain and disability caused by severe degenerative joint disease secondary to hip dysplasia.

Other reasons include hip fractures, chronic dislocation of the hip and acute dislocation of the hip that cannot be reduced because of hip dysplasia or soft tissue damage. The presence of any and all of the aforementioned conditions leads to hip joint laxity, subluxation (partial dislocation) and or luxation (complete dislocation) which ultimately leads to varying degrees of degenerative arthritic change. Contrary to what one may think, many dogs with arthritic hip joints seem to function normally while others exhibit severe crippling disease. In addition, the severity of the clinical signs does not necessarily correlate with the degree of radiographic or pathologic changes seen. Breed and individual differences in temperament may also affect the amount of discomfort exhibited. Total hip replacement is now a well-established procedure in veterinary orthopedic surgery. Although there are some variations in technique and types of implant, most involve the replacement of the acetabulum with an ultra-high molecular weight polyethylene cup and the femoral head with a cobalt chrome ball and stem which are secured in position with acrylic (cemented) or porous coated implants resulting in normal or near normal function and activity.

Total Hip Replacement
Total Hip Replacement
Total Hip Replacement
Total Hip Replacement

Clinical signs including lameness, reluctance to exercise and difficulty rising, using the stairs or jumping into and/or out of the car are often signs of hip related problems. Lameness of the hind limb varies from barely-detectable gait abnormalities to non-weight-bearing lameness. Lameness is usually especially evident after exercise periods. A “bunny-hopping” gait is often seen in affected young dogs and is characterized by simultaneous advancement of both hind limbs while running. Young dysplastic dogs often lay on their belly with limbs outstretched behind them. Pain is often elicited during full extension of the joint by a veterinarian. Hip dysplasia is not generally an acute lameness, but one of the slow progression of lameness severity. It is not uncommon for dogs with hip osteoarthritis to have in addition, other orthopedic injuries. Many times it is these other problems that are the source of the lameness that prompted the visit to the veterinarian in the first place. The most common conditions which may mimic or be confused with clinically painful hips include cauda equine syndrome, cranial cruciate ligament tears, other rear limb arthritic conditions and neoplasia. Since dogs can have profound radiographic changes with arthritis and yet have few if any symptoms, any new lameness exhibited by such a dog, or sudden worsening of what had heretofore been a mild lameness, should prompt skepticism that it is due to the hips until proven to be so. Only when other causes have been excluded or treated should attention be focused on the hips and medical and surgical treatment such as THR be contemplated.

Not all dogs with hip dysplasia or osteoarthritis require surgical treatment. The decision for performing a THR and the timing for joint replacement surgery depends on a number of factors, including the degree of clinical disability and discomfort, intended use of the dog, and the presence of other diseases or injuries. As mentioned previously the decision to perform THR is never based on radiographs alone, no matter how severe the changes appear. There can be a poor correlation between radiographic severity and clinical severity, and some dogs with terrible looking hips are yet functioning at a high athletic level with no apparent pain. So the decision to treat arthritic hips, with medicine or surgery, is always based on whatever clinical disability the patient is exhibiting.

Medical management to alleviate clinical symptoms is always attempted prior to surgical intervention as many dogs with degenerative arthritis can be kept comfortable and active with medical management. It is important to keep the patient at a normal body weight and to provide regular, controlled activity. Medical management includes the administration of steroidal or non-steroidal anti-inflammatories, muscle relaxants, poly-sulfated glycosaminoglycans (Adequan), hyaluronic acid (Legend), neutraceuticals (glucosamine, chondroitin, msm, creatine), omega 3 and 6 essential fatty acids, platelet rich plasma, Class IV laser therapy, acupuncture and physical therapy. If hip pain persists in spite of appropriate medical management, surgical therapy should be considered. The decision to intervene with surgery is based on the amount of pain, discomfort and lameness exhibited by the dog. Typically the patient has been refractory to medical therapy or has not returned to an acceptable level of performance. The decision to proceed with surgery should not wait until there is severe pain and/or loss of muscle mass as this may compromise the surgical result. Since total hip replacement results in near normal to normal function and activity, if medical treatment does not alleviate clinical symptoms, then surgical treatment is recommended.

Surgical options include femoral head and neck ostectomy (FHO) with or without a biceps sling or total hip replacement. While the purpose of this article is THR, it is appropriate to diverge and mention the FHO procedure as this has been the contemporary surgical option to treat coxofemoral pathology in smaller dogs and cats. An FHO with a biceps sling removes the femoral head and interposes muscle between the acetabulum and femoral neck so that there is no longer bone rubbing on bone in the diseased joint. While this can relieve much of the pain, the loss of the normal ball-and-socket anatomic structure of the hip may result in a limb that will not function normal mechanically. Small, light-weight dogs and cats do better than large dogs with an FHO. The advantages of FHO include easier recovery, less risky complications, and less expense. If a femoral head and neck excision was performed previously, the results of total hip replacement are generally not as rewarding as cases receiving hip replacement initially.  An FHO can be converted into a total hip replacement, however, it is a technically demanding procedure with a higher complication rate than primary total hip replacement.  The longer the interval from the FHO to the total hip, the more difficult the total hip replacement becomes, with the best results occurring if the total hip replacement is performed early (4-6 weeks) after the FHO. Conversion of an FHO to a THR should not be recommended, as calcar support for the prosthesis is removed by the excision arthroplasty, there is a higher risk of infection and there may be inadequate muscular support for the prosthesis.

After FHO, especially in large dogs, the hindlimb is shortened to a variable degree, biomechanical function is altered, pain relief may be unpredictable, muscle atrophy with weakness is a common long-term finding and postoperative rehabilitation is prolonged. On the contrary, published reports of objective measures taken following THR in large dogs consistently document a return to normal function. The goal of THR is a pain-free joint that mimics normal biomechanics with excellent long-term function. THR is a common procedure used to treat degenerative arthritis and other hip arthropathies in large dogs, and it should be considered in smaller patients. Total hip replacement has historically been used in medium, large and giant breed dogs. There is now a much wider range of implant sizes, so it is available for small dogs as well. Truly, the only drawback to the utilization of THR in smaller patients is its expense and the fact that these smaller implants are usually cemented rather than porous-coated.

Total hip replacement techniques fall into two categories: Cemented and Cementless. Cemented THR provides fine short term, but less satisfactory long term outcomes. Cemented implants are held in place with an acrylic, but there may be break down of the interface between the cement and bone over time. For this reason, in the past, total hip replacement was only considered in older dogs. This was due to concerns with how long the cemented implants would remain stable. With the uncemented, porous-coated implants that we now use, break-down of the interface is unlikely and the high quality of the plastic of the cup will help it last for the life of the dog. Porous-coated implants become stable by in-growth of bone into their beaded surface in the first few weeks to months after implantation. Implants can be placed in young dogs with the expectation that they will provide a lifetime of pain-free function, and are preferentially indicated for hip replacement in young dogs.

In many dogs, both hips are arthritic. In most cases, the hip with the worse function is operated on first. This results in good to excellent function in about 75 percent of dogs. The other 25 percent remain somewhat lame on the opposite hip, and total hip replacement of the other side is considered in these cases.

Both hips are never operated upon at the same time because bilateral surgery increases discomfort and the risk of complications.  For this reason the two surgeries are separated by approximately 3-4 months in most cases. If function is good after the worse hip is replaced, the second hip may not need surgery and continued medical management may continue to alleviate clinical symptoms.

As there are risks inherent with any major surgical procedure, these risks should be thoroughly discussed with the client prior to surgical intervention. The current complication rate following total hip replacement is 2 to 5 percent. Complications are best treated when identified early. Significant complications include but are not limited to:

  • Dislocation of the prosthetic joint is rare, and is most likely to occur in the first 4 weeks after surgery. It may be corrected manually, but another surgery is often necessary.
  • Infection is a serious potential problem. If it occurs in the area of the wound, it is generally treated with antibiotics. If it occurs in the bone, removal of the prosthesis may be necessary.
  • Subsidence or sinking of the stem – a small amount of settling of the stem has no effect on function of the prosthetic joint. A large amount of subsidence or stem rotation may require surgical revision of the stem.
  • Fissure or Fracture of the femur – uncemented implants are hammered into place. Fissures can develop. If they are seen during surgery, wire is placed to prevent them from expanding. If they develop after surgery, they may lead to subsidence of the stem, or fracture of the bone. Another surgery would be required to manage this issue.
  • Loosening of the prosthesis is an uncommon problem with uncemented prostheses. If loosening is significant or progressive, the implant may need to be replaced or removed.

Most dogs are able to stand and walk on the new prosthesis within the first few days after surgery. While hospitalized, exercise is restricted to cage confinement with 10 to 15 minute walks under leash restraint twice daily. Most animals undergoing total hip replacement are hospitalized for a total of 3 to 4 days.

During the first month at home, the dog must have very limited activity. During this crucial period the joint capsule, muscles and tendons are healing, and helping to stabilize the hip. This means that dogs are allowed short walks only, and only on a leash. Otherwise the dog should be kept confined. Dogs should not run, play, jump, or climb flights of stairs. During this time, care should be taken to avoid activity on slippery surfaces, and stairs should be climbed only while the dog is under the direct control of the owner. Going up and down one or two steps to get outside is acceptable. Management at home will require strict supervision, and activity must be restricted in order to optimize surgical recovery. Adherence to postoperative restrictions can minimize potential complication. One month after surgery, supervised exercise can be gradually increased over the next 4 weeks. During this second month dogs are still limited in their activity, but can start increasing the length of their walks outside. At the end of 8 weeks, more normal activity is allowed. Between the second and third month activity is gradually increased so that by the end of the third month the dog is nearly back to normal function and activity. Vigorous, rough play or hard work is allowed after gaining strength and conditioning. Radiographic evaluation and orthopedic examination are necessary at 3 and 6 months after surgery, and every 2 years thereafter. This provides a history of the patient’s progress and may help to detect potential complications.

The majority of dogs are found to be more comfortable and have an improved quality of life following THR. Many owners report that their pet can do things they have not done since they were a puppy. Increase in muscle mass, improved hip motion, and increased activity levels are observed in most patients. Up to 95% of the dogs whose hips have been replaced return to normal or near normal ambulatory function. More than 95% of owners feel that their dog’s quality of life is significantly improved following THR. Although the state-of the-art equipment, implants, advanced technical expertise and training which go into the THR surgery are expensive, few other procedures are capable of so dramatically changing the quality of a pet’s life. It is for these reasons that THR is the surgical treatment of choice in both juvenile and adult dogs to obtain the best functional outcome when the pain and discomfort of degenerative arthritis is refractory to medical therapy.

Canine Hip Dysplasia

Canine Hip Dysplasia-Part 1

Pathophysiology and Diagnosis

Canine hip dysplasia (CHD) is an inherited developmental disorder of the coxofemoral joint commonly affecting many of the larger breeds of dogs. Patients with clinical signs referable to CHD are regularly presented for evaluation and treatment, and selection of the most appropriate medical or surgical therapy requires a comprehensive orthopedic evaluation of each individual. The purpose of this series of articles is to describe the pathophysiology of the disease and the techniques employed for its successful diagnosis as well as the indications for the multitude of surgical procedures utilized to treat the condition.

Pathophysiology and Diagnosis

The cause and pathogenesis of canine hip dysplasia are still poorly understood; however, numerous studies over the last 15 years have indicated that CHD is a developmental disorder and that multiple factors can influence or modify the expression of the disease. No specific genetic pattern of inheritance has been demonstrated; however, the pattern of inheritance is multi-factorial. The spread of hip dysplasia is centered around the genetic transmission and heritability of a particular body size, type, confirmation, and growth pattern. The occurrence of hip dysplasia has been reduced by breeding dogs that have radiographically disease-free joints and by selecting dogs for breeding based on family performance and progeny selection. Unfortunately, many factors affect the choice of dogs used in breeding programs and breeding dogs for desirable traits (i.e., large size, temperament) may result in the inadvertent selection of dogs predisposed to CHD. Therefore, while CHD is a heritable disease, controlled breeding programs have only reduced the prevalence of hip dysplasia, but the disease has not been eliminated.

Dogs with the highest incident of hip dysplasia are large, rapidly growing and maturing breeds with a heavy body confirmation. It has been speculated that slow growth and late maturation favors the completion of ossification and development of the joint before the hips are subjected to possible injury from excessive extrinsic forces, especially excessive body weight. Rapid growth and early weight gain may result in disparities of tissue development triggering a series of events leading to subluxation, hip dysplasia, and degenerative joint disease. While the role of nutrition has been thoroughly investigated, diet has not affected the occurrence or course of CHD other than the mechanical effect of increased or decreased weight upon the hip.

Several hormones have been implicated as playing a role in causing CHD, including estrogen and relaxin. Based on the results of several studies, there is no evidence that hormonal influence (within the biologic range) is associated with the development of spontaneously developing hip dysplasia in the dog.

A causal relationship between pelvic muscle mass and/or muscle myopathies and hip dysplasia has also been advanced. The disparity between primary muscle mass and/or failure of the muscles to develop and reach maturity at the same rate as the pelvis may lead to alterations in the function of pelvic muscles and the development of CHD. There are substantial evidence that the consequence of hip joint laxity. Joint laxity is thought to precede hip joint remodeling and degenerative joint disease. The possibility that joint laxity may be associated with or influenced by pelvic muscle mass and/or maturation as well as by the anatomic structures important in maintaining hip stability (i.e., ligament of the head of the femur, joint capsule, joint confirmation) has been extensively explored. The available evidence, however, does not single out any one factor or variable, which would lead to increased joint laxity. In conclusion, the confirmation and stability of the hip is governed by a number of factors which influence the congruency of the articular surfaces between the femoral head and acetabulum, the integrity of the joint capsule and ligamentum teres, combined with the overall mass and strength of the associated pelvic musculature. The failure of one or more of the orthopedic or soft tissue supporting structures leads to joint laxity with stretching and confirmational change of the aforementioned structures, progressive subluxation, hip dysplasia, and resultant degenerative joint disease.

The clinical signs of hip dysplasia are many and varied, ranging from minimal to pronounced pain, lameness, and disability. Symptoms may be seen as early as four weeks of age, but are generally not detected until 4-6 months of age. Physical examination must include gait analysis, palpation, and precise radiography of the hip.

Observation of the gait may disclose a weight bearing lameness, which is more severe after exercise, a stilted or swaying rear limb gait, an audible “click” when walking, or walking with an arched back. There may also be pain and/or crepitation present upon manipulation of the hip and evidence of poorly developed musculature of the hind quarters.

Palpation of the hip has been utilized to determine the presence or absence of joint laxity and early CHD, especially in immature dogs. The ability to accurately quantitate hip joint laxity should provide key diagnostic and prognostic information for affected dogs. There are, however, a number of concerns, which must be addressed relating to the accuracy of palpation as a method of diagnosis. Palpation is at best a subjective evaluation and is influenced by practitioner experience, positioning of the dogs, amount of forced applied, and whether or not the dog is anesthetized. As of yet, an objective method of determining the amount of joint laxity of subluxation in dogs manifesting symptoms of CHD prior to the development of detectable radiographic changes. The two most common procedures employed are the Bardens’ method and the test for the Ortolani sign, both of which are described extremely well in the article authored by Chalman and Butler. The Bardens’ test detects movement of the femoral head in and out of the acetabulum as the femur is lifted horizontally. Elicitation of an Ortolani sign may be performed with the patient in either dorsal or lateral recumbancy. During testing, the application of pressure along the femoral shaft will subluxate the femoral head dorsally. As the limb is abducted, the femoral head will reseat within the acetablulum. The resulting sound and vibrations or “clicks” produced by this reseating is a positive Ortolani sign. The degree of grading residence of “click” gives an appreciation of the severity of the existing pathology. Dogs with extensive pathology, however, may have a negative Ortolani sign because distortion of the acetabular rim combined with a thickened joint capsule and osteophyte production may lead to an extremely limited range of motion. In these cases, however, radiographic evidence of joint distortion exists and diagnosis should be straightforward.

Although observation of the gait and palpation of the hip can indicate the possibility of CHD, radiographic examination is used to establish the diagnosis in the majority of cases. Historically, radiographic evaluation consists of a symmetric ventrodorsal radiograph of the pelvis and femors with the hind limbs extended and parallel to each other. Lateral pelvic views contribute minimally in the assessment of possible CHD. A major deficiency in this standard radiographic view is the failure to adequately delineate the weight bearing portion of the acetabulum. In addition, this hip extended position may mask the true potential hip joint laxity because in this position, the joint capsule tightens and may act to drive the femoral head into the acetabulum. The dorsal acetabular rim radiographic view has been recommended to evaluate the dorsal rim of the acetabulum for damage and secondary changes to show acetabular filling and congruency of the hip and to correlate palpation of joint laxity and crepitation with radiographic appearance.

The primary radiographic signs of CHD are a shallow acetabulum and a small flattened femoral head. The dorsal acetabular rim recedes and becomes less concave, and increased joint space and subluxation or luxation of the femoral head is observed. As dysplasia progresses, joint instability, synovitis, and cartilage degeneration increase as evidenced by radiographic indication of osteoarthritic changes including femoral neck and acetabular osteophyte development, sclerosis of subchondral bone, subcondral cysts of the femoral head, and ossification of the joint capsule.

While one study reports excellent success in obtaining pelvic radiographs of dogs for hip dysplasia without sedation or anesthesia, chemical restraint is usually employed to achieve proper positioning. Once again, while anesthesia allows for proper positioning, the effects of anesthesia on the relaxation of tissues in the hip joint region and how this may affect the radiographic diagnosis of CHD needs to be taken into consideration.

In conclusion, CHD is a developmental disorder, the expression of which is influenced by a multitude of factors. Gait analysis, palpation, and radiography are indicated to establish a correct diagnosis, but the incipient disease may be difficult to identify because interpretation of the aforementioned diagnostic procedures can be subjective and requires a great deal of skill and expertise for accuracy.

In the next article, we will discuss the treatment of the young growing dog with hip dysplasia. The third article will address the treatment of the mature dog with secondary osteoarthritic changes and degenerative joint disease.

Canine Hip Dysplasia

Canine Hip Dysplasia-Part 2

Surgical Treatment for the Immature Patient

A number of different surgical techniques have been employed to treat canine hip dysplasia. The procedure, which is ultimately selected, should be based upon careful observation and evaluation of the individual patient. Criteria, which must be addressed, include the age of the patient; the severity of subluxation (i.e., the angle of Wiberg); the angle of inclination and anteversion; the depth of the acetabulum; and the presence or absence of femoral head deformity and associated changes indicative of osteoarthritis.

Canine Hip Dysplasia

The surgical procedures most commonly recommended for treatment include triple pelvic osteotomy; intertrochanteric de-rotational femoral osteotomy; excision arthroplasty with or without a bicep sling; and total hip replacement.

The advantages, as well as the indication for each of these procedures, will be discussed in this and in a future article.

The primary goal of surgical intervention for the treatment of canine hip dysplasia in the majority of immature patients is re-direction of the acetabulum. The restoration of hip stability promotes a more normal development of the hip and results in a decrease or halt of the osteoarthritic changes typically associated with a degerenative joint disease.

Because the ultimate goal in a young dog is to help reshape the acetabulum so as to create more depth to accommodate the femoral head and save the hip joint, the technique of choice is the triple pelvic osteotomy (TPO). This procedure presupposes that the femoral component of the hip is normal. Triple pelvic osteotomy is not designed to correct the subluxation problems associated with coxa valga, i.e., increased angle of inclination or increased anteversion of the proximal femur. Such problems need to be addressed by performing a varus osteotomy and demonstrated, however, that if the acetabular component is repositioned such that normal congruency of the joint is maintained, the femoral changes will revert toward normal with time.

Fortunately, in my experience, a femoral osteotomy is usually not necessary, although several studies have indicated that functional results tend to be less satisfactory in dogs having the largest angles of anteversion. Varus and/or intertrochanteric osteotomy is most appropriate in the young dog with subluxation and femoral dysplasia without acetabular dysplasia. As acetabular dysplasia is frequently present, these techniques are seldom employed as a sole means of surgical correction. As previously mentioned, the overwhelming majority of patients exhibit acetabular dysplasia, and the resulting new position obtained by a TPO produces adequate acetabular depth to provide hip stability. However, femoral osteotomy needs to be considered as an ancillary procedure in some cases.

The ideal candidates for a TPO are immature dogs with pain and/or lameness associated with hip subluxation. Since the purpose of the TPO is to prevent the development of degenerative joint disease, only those joints with minimal or no preexisting degenerative joint disease should be considered as candidates for the procedure. When radiographic changes of osteoarthritis are present, excision arthroplasty or total hip replacement may be indicated as the likelihood of success with a TPO is minimized.

The dog’s age is also an important consideration, as rapid breakdown of the dorsal acetabular rim occurs from 4 to 8 months of age in dysplastic puppies. For these reasons, the surgery should be performed prior to nine to ten months of age to achieve best results. However, if the other criteria mentioned previously have been met, good clinical results can still be achieved in older dogs.

Another prerequisite of surgery is the ability to reduce the hip while the patient is under general anesthesia. If the hip cannot be reduced and stabilized by the femoral abduction and internal rotation, there is a diminished chance of success that a TPO would produce good hip stability. Dogs with complete luxation of the hip (grade IV hip dysplasia) however, have been successfully treated with this procedure.

As with any other surgical procedure, numerous techniques and variations of TPO have been developed and used over the last several years to enhance success and minimize complications. The earlier techniques advocated a stair-step osteotomy of the ilium and internal stabilization consisting of screw and wire fixation with or without trochanteric osteotomy. More recently, techniques have employed straight osteotomy of the ilium and rigid internal fixation utilizing bone plates with or without ischial wiring. My own personal preference is to use an oscillating saw to perform the pubic, ischial, and ilial osteotomies through three separate skin incisions. The freely movable acetabular segment is then rotated and tilted into its new position, and rigid stability is achieved and maintained by application of a special pre-contoured bone plate.

Canine Hip Dysplasia

Routine post-operative care consists of confinement and restriction of exercise throughout the immediate post-operative period. Strict rest and confinement should eliminate the potential complication of loss of fixation. Other complications include constipation, urethral impingement, and sciatic nerve injury. Constipation is usually easily alleviated with the administration of stool softener. The proper surgical technique should prevent complication related to urethral and/or sciatic injury. The overwhelming majority of animals will begin bearing weight on the operated limb within 24 to 48 hours, although significant additional time is required for complete healing.

All in all, a triple pelvic osteotomy is an extremely successful treatment of choice for hip dysplasia in the immature dog. This high degree of success, however, depends upon the careful selection of surgical candidates and familiarity with the surgical techniques available.

Canine Hip Dysplasia

Canine Hip Dysplasia-Part 3

Surgical Treatment for the Mature Patient

Although it is highly preferable to diagnose and treat canine hip dysplasia (CHD) in the immature patient, numerous dogs are presented with initial clinical signs of pain and lameness associated with hip subluxation once they have achieved maturity. While triple pelvic osteotomies are routinely performed on mature dogs with no or minimal pre-existing degenerative joint disease with a great degree of success, when moderate to severe radiographic changes of osteoarthritis are present, excision arthroplasty with or without a biceps sling or total hip replacement (THR) is indicated as the likelihood of success with a triple pelvic osteotomy is minimized. The purpose of this article is to discuss the advantages and disadvantages as well as the indication for each of these procedures.

Any discussion about the operative procedures utilized for degenerative disease of the canine coxofemoral joint must be preceded by mention of the fact that the procedure ultimately performed depends upon the surgeon’s experience and training. While this seems intuitively obvious, surgeons are extremely adamant in their views (also intuitively obvious) about which procedure is beset for management of degenerative hip dysplasia in the canine. While some surgeons consider a femoral head and neck excision, a salvage procedure one step short of an amputation, others feel that the inherent risks involved in a THR do not warrant its utilization as a form of treatment. In light of this fact, the discussion of the operative procedures available will proceed from the least aggressive to the most aggressive options rather than from worst to best or visa versa.

Femoral head and neck ostectomy (FHO) is a relatively simple procedure that has been used frequently to eliminate the pain experienced by dysplastic patients. Because the procedure does not reconstruct an intact coxofemoral joint, normal function of the joint is not restored. While the formation of a false joint often alleviates pain and produces increased weight bearing ability on the affected limb, post-operative sequellae including shortening of the affected limb, muscle atrophy, decreased range of motion of the pseudoarthrosis and continued pain, and/or lameness is not uncommon after simple excision of the femoral head and neck. Although these residual clinical signs may result from the biomechanical alterations associated with the formation of a false joint, they may also be attributable to persistent abnormal contact of the proximal femur with the pelvis. For these reasons, various modifications of the standard technique for excision arthroplasty have been developed to prevent bone on bone contact between the cut surface of the femoral neck and the acetabulum.

My own clinical observation has been that in dogs receiving excision, arthroplasty of the femoral head and neck alone increased morbidity, and generally overall, poorer results are achieved than if an ancillary, interpositional procedure is concurrently performed. It is therefore my own personal preference to discourage utilization of a simple FHO for treatment of degenerative joint disease of the canine hip and to rely instead on an ancillary interpositional procedure in combination with an FHO or total hip replacement. While a variety of tissues including the joint capsule and the deep gluteal and biceps femoris muscles have been mobilized to prevent bone on bone contact between the pelvis and the cut surface of the femoral neck, utilization of the biceps femoris allows for a wider and thicker flap of muscle to be mobilized easily for translocation.

The advantages and disadvantages of performance of a biceps sling compared to a simple FHO have been debated for a number of years. Surgeons that discourage its utilization argue that the increased operative time and potential morbidity (i.e., increased swelling or edema of the operated limb, wound infection, sciatic nerve entrapment), outweigh any potential benefits including excellent coverage of the ostectomy site, to decreased bone on bone contact, and the promotion of early post-surgical use of the limb.

Over the course of the last nine years, I have had considerable exposure to and experience with the biceps sling, and my clinical impression is that these patients, while perhaps not being restored to a totally normal state, fare far better than if a simple FHO had been performed. In fact, the overwhelming majority return to at least good, if not excellent, function over a relatively short period of time, free from pain, discomfort, and crepitation at the ostectomy site. Excision arthroplasty of the femoral head and neck utilizing a biceps femoris muscle sling is certainly an effective alternative to total hip replacement.

Total hip replacement is a rewarding method of treatment for canine hip dysplasia as the best approach to restoring normal hip function is to reestablish as closely as possible normal joint configuration. While standard operative procedures have been in use for more than 15 years, recent advances in surgical technique and modifications of the implants themselves have led to greater acceptance of the procedure as complication rates have decreased and long term success has been documented. The hesitancy to recommend THR as the primary means of treatment of canine hip dysplasia outside of limited availability and cost has been the potential for complications including prosthesis dislocation, deep infection, loosening of the implants, femoral fracture, and sciatic neuropraxia. Once again, by paying strict attention to detail, the potential for complications following THR is minimized and excellent long-term success rates can be achieved, clearly demonstrating the THR is an effective method of treating canine hip dysplasia.

In conclusion, it should be mentioned that patient selection for any of the aforementioned procedures is of the utmost importance. A dog that has hip dysplasia but has clinically sound ambulatory function is not a candidate for surgery. Many dogs function with minimal pain or impairment on medical management alone, despite tremendous bony changes. Others, with what appear to be minimal lesions, are severely hindered. It follows then that a reasonable effort at medical management must have been tried and failed. The point of medical failure must be clearly recognized, however, because continuing medical therapy after these treatments have become ineffective decreases the chances for surgical success. In addition, an accurate neurologic examination is mandatory, as many myelopathies co-exist in dysplastic dogs. If there is the presence of neurologic degeneration, the dog should not be considered a surgical candidate.

In response to the poor results consistently obtained with excision arthroplasty in large dogs, my recommendation is to avoid this procedure as a treatment for hip dysplasia and to rely instead on a biceps sling surgery or a total hip replacement. The determination of which of these two procedures to use depends upon the client’s expectations for return to function and the degree to which they are willing to accept the potential limitations and/or complications associated with each procedure.

canine hip-dysplasia