Page 235 - Canine Lameness
P. 235

14.6 Medial Compartment Disease  207

             (A)                        (C)                       (E)




















             (B)                        (D)                       (F)                           ELBOW REGION




















             Figure 14.6  Examination to detect elbow dysplasia: (A) flexion of the elbow; (B) isolated hyperextension
             of the elbow without hyperextension of the shoulder; (C, E) palpation of joint effusion caudal to the
             humeral epicondyles; (D, F) the “Campbell’s test” is performed by pronating and supinating the limb while
             keeping the carpus and elbow flexed at approximately 90° and applying gentle pressure to the area of the
             medial aspect of the coronoid process.

             14.6.3  Diagnostics
             Unfortunately, establishing a diagnosis in the juvenile patient frequently requires advanced imag-
             ing since radiographs may only show subtle changes. Such changes may include sclerosis of the
             ulnar trochlear notch, an indistinct coronoid process, incongruity, and mild degenerative changes
             (Figure 14.7). Once osteoarthritis is established, the diagnosis is easily accomplished with radiog-
             raphy. Although a CT is generally recommended in juvenile patients to accomplish a diagnosis, it
             is important to consider that even this modality is not 100% accurate with a reported specificity of
             85–93% (Groth et al. 2009; Villamonte-Chevalier et al. 2015). Hence, the diagnosis of MCD may
             require  arthroscopy  in  addition  to  CT,  particularly  for  cases  that  are  suffering  from  cartilage
             changes only (Coppieters et al. 2015). Additional diagnostic steps may include intra-articular injec-
             tion of mepivacaine (Chapter 8). This diagnostic tool is helpful if a positive effect is observed (i.e.
             to confirm the diagnosis of ED) but has been shown to have an approximately 10% chance of false-
             negative results (Van Vynckt et al. 2012).
   230   231   232   233   234   235   236   237   238   239   240