Analysis of feline humeral fracture morphology and a comparison of fracture repair stabilisation methods: 101 cases (2009–2020)

Author:

Gall Nick1ORCID,Parsons Kevin1,Radke Heidi2,Comerford Eithne3,Mielke Ben4,Grierson James5,Ryan John6,Addison Elena7,Logethelou Vasileia3,Blaszyk Agnieszka6,Langley-Hobbs Sorrel J1ORCID

Affiliation:

1. Langford Veterinary Services, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK

2. Department of Veterinary Medicine, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK

3. School of Veterinary Science, Leahurst Campus, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK

4. Department of Clinical Science and Services, Royal Veterinary College, London, UK

5. Anderson Moores Veterinary Specialists, Winchester, UK

6. Royal (Dick) School of Veterinary Studies and the Roslin Institute, The University of Edinburgh, Roslin, UK

7. Division of Small Animal Clinical Science, School of Veterinary Medicine, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK

Abstract

Objectives The aims of this study were to describe the type, presentation and prognostic factors of feline humeral fractures over a 10-year period and to compare three stabilisation systems for feline humeral diaphyseal fractures. Methods In total, 101 cats with humeral fractures presenting to seven UK referral centres between 2009 and 2020 were reviewed. Data collected included signalment, weight at the time of surgery, fracture aetiology, preoperative presentation, fixation method, surgical details, perioperative management and follow-up examinations. Of these cases, 57 cats with humeral diaphyseal fractures stabilised using three different fixation methods were compared, with outcome parameters including the time to radiographic healing, time to function and complication rate. Results The majority of the fractures were diaphyseal (71%), with only 10% condylar. Of the known causes of fracture, road traffic accidents (RTAs) were the most common. Neutered males were over-represented in having a fracture caused by an RTA ( P = 0.001) and diaphyseal fractures were significantly more likely to result from an RTA ( P = 0.01). Body weight had a positive correlation ( r = 0.398) with time to radiographic healing and time to acceptable function ( r = 0.315), and was significant ( P = 0.014 and P = 0.037, respectively). Of the 57 humeral diaphyseal fractures; 16 (28%) were stabilised using a plate–rod construct, 31 (54%) using external skeletal fixation and 10 (18%) using bone plating and screws only. Open diaphyseal fractures were associated with more minor complications ( P = 0.048). There was a significant difference between fixation groups in terms of overall complication rate between groups ( P = 0.012). There was no significant difference between fixation groups in time to radiographic union ( P = 0.145) or time to acceptable function ( P = 0.306). Conclusions and relevance All three fixation systems were successful in healing a wide variety of humeral diaphyseal fractures. There was a significantly higher overall complication rate with external skeletal fixators compared with bone plating; however, the clinical impact of these is likely low.

Publisher

SAGE Publications

Subject

Small Animals

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3