Comparison of Trochlear Block Recession and Trochlear Wedge Recession for Canine Patellar Luxation Using a Cadaver Model

• Published in: Veterinary surgery Vol. 30; no. 2; pp. 140 - 150
• Main Authors: Johnson, Allen L., Probst, Curtis W., Decamp, Charles E., Rosenstein, Diana S., Hauptman, Joe G., Weaver, Brian T., Kern, Teri L.
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Oxford, UK Blackwell Science Inc 01-03-2001
• Subjects: Animals; Biomechanical Phenomena; Cadaver; Dog Diseases - physiopathology; Dog Diseases - surgery; Dogs; Joint Diseases - physiopathology; Joint Diseases - surgery; Joint Diseases - veterinary; Joint Dislocations - surgery; Joint Dislocations - veterinary; Patella - physiopathology; Radiography; Stifle - diagnostic imaging; Stifle - surgery
• ISSN: 0161-3499; 1532-950X
• DOI: 10.1053/jvet.2001.21391

Objective— To compare trochlear block recession (TBR) to trochlear wedge recession (TWR) with regards to patellar depth (percentage of patellar volume under the trochlear ridges), patellar articular contact, percentage of recessed trochlear surface area, and resistance to patellar luxation.
Study Design— In vitro computed tomography (CT) and biomechanical evaluation using a cadaver model.
Sample Population— Twelve normal, large‐breed canine cadavers.
Methods— Bilateral pelvic limb specimens with intact stifle joints were mounted on a positioning device. The femoral trochlear ridges were reduced to provide a standard shallow trochlea. TBR or TWR was performed to a standard depth randomly on paired specimens. CT and biomechanical evaluations were performed pre‐ and postoperatively in both an extended (148°) and flexed (113°) stifle position. CT images were digitized and measurements made using an image‐analysis software program. Biomechanical testing consisted of applying 40° of internal tibial rotation and documenting patellar luxation.
Results— The change in trochlear depth (depth of recession) was not significantly different between groups. In the extended stifle position (patella in the proximal trochlea), patellar depth and patellar articular contact with the recessed trochlea were significantly greater after TBR compared with TWR. The percentage of recessed trochlear surface area was significantly greater after TBR compared with TWR. In the extended position, a smaller percentage of the patellae luxated within 40° of internal tibial rotation after TBR compared with TWR.
Conclusions— TBR increases proximal patellar depth, increases patellar articular contact with the recessed proximal trochlea, recesses a larger percentage of trochlear surface area, and results in a greater resistance to patellar luxation in an extended position as compared with TWR.
Clinical Relevance— TBR may help limit the development of stifle DJD in dogs treated for canine patellar luxation.