Kedilerin Distal Diyafizer ve Suprakonduler Femur Kiriklarinin Dinamik Intramedüller Çapraz Pin Tekniği ile Tedavisi

Yıl 2021, Cilt: 10 Sayı: 2, 184 - 190, 12.12.2021

Metehan Turan Cebeci Birkan Karslı

https://doi.org/10.31196/huvfd.1008198

Cited By: 3

Öz

Bu çalışma, 11 adet suprakondiler femur kırığı ve 1 adet distal diafizer femur kırığı tespit edilen 12 kedide gerçekleştirilmiştir. Olguların, kırık özellikleri, operasyon detayları, operasyon sonrası oluşan komplikasyonlar ve radyografik görüntüleri kaydedilmiştir. Çalışmadaki suprakondiler kırıklar Salter‐ arris’e göre sınıflandırılmış olup; 1 tanesinde tip I, 7 tanesinde Tip II, 3 tanesinde Tip IV kırığı belirlenmiştir. Kırıklardan Salter‐Harris tip II, tip I ve distal diafizer femur kırığı olan hastalara dinamik intramedüller çapraz pin tekniği uygulanmış, Salter‐Harris tip IV kırığı olanlara ise dinamik intramedüller çapraz pin ve interkonduler vida uygulaması yapılmıştır. Operasyonu gerçekleştirilen 12 hastanın 8’sinde ilgili ekstremitedeki bandajın çıkarılmasından sonra ekstremitelerini kullandıkları tespit edildi. Salter‐Harris tip IV kırığı olan 2 hastada diğer bölgelerdeki kırıklar sebebi ile topallık görüldü fakat kemik iyileşmesi tamamlandıktan sonra ekstremite hareketinin normale döndüğü görüldü. Salter‐Harris tip IV kırığı olan bir hastada travma sonucu eklemdeki hasarın büyüklüğü sebebiyle eklem açısında daralma ve topallama görüldü. Salter‐Harris tip I kırığı olan bir vakada operasyondan 5 gün sonra pin migrasyonu gerçekleşti ve ikinci bir operasyon yapılarak çapraz pin tekniği uygulandı. Elde edilen bulgular sonucunda kedilerde oluşan suprakondiler femur kırıklarının tedavisinde dinamik intramedüllar çapraz pin tekniğinin etkin olduğu görülmüştür.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Femur, Kedi, İnramedullar pin, Tedavi

Treatment of Cats Distal Diaphyseal and Supracondylar Femur Fractures with Dynamic Intramedullary Cross Pinning Technique

Öz

This study was conducted on 12 cats with 11 supracondylar femur fractures and one distal diaphyseal femur fracture. Fracture properties, operation details, postoperative complications, and radiographic images of the cases were recorded. The supracondylar fractures in the study were classified according to Salter‐Harris, and they were determined as type I in 1, Type II in 7, and Type IV in 3 of them. Dynamic intramedullary cross pinning technique was applied to patients with Salter‐Harris type II, type I and distal diaphyseal femur fractures, dynamic intramedullary cross pinning, and intercondylar screw application, as for that, was applied to patients with Salter‐Harris type IV fractures. It was observed that 8 of the 12 patients who were operated on used their extremities after removing the bandage on the relevant extremity. In two patients with Salter‐Harris type IV fractures, lameness was observed due to fractures in other regions, but extremity movement returned to normal after healing the bone. A patient with a Salter‐Harris type IV fracture, due to the extent of the damage to the joint as a result of trauma, had narrowing and limping in the joint angle. In a patient with a Salter‐Harris type I fracture, pin migration occurred five days after the operation, and the cross‐pinning technique was applied in a second operation. In consequence of the findings, it was observed that the dynamic intramedullary cross pinning technique was influential in the treatment of supracondylar femur fractures in cats.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Femur, Cat, Intamedullar pinning, Treatment

Kaynakça

• Aithal, H.P., Singh, G.R., Sharma, A.K. and Amarpal, 1998: Modified technique ofsingle pin fixation and cross intramedullary pin fixation technique for supracondylarfemoral fracture in dogs: A comparative study. Indian J. Vet. Surg., 19(2): 84-89.
• Altunatmaz K, Karabagli M, Aydın Kaya D et al. 2017: The treatment of supracondylar and diaphyseal femoral fractures in cats using intramedullary two-way stacked Kirschner wire application.Turk J Vet AnimSci 41: 282-287
• Beale B, 2004: Orthopedic Clinical Techniques Femur Fracture Repair. Clin Tech Small AnimPract, 19:134-150.
• Chandler JC, Beale BS, 2002: Feline orthopedics. Clin Tech Small AnimPract,17:(4), 190-203.
• Deyoung D J and Probst C W. 1993: Methods of internalfracturefixation. (Ed.) Slatter D H. Textbook of Small AnimalSurgery. 2nd edn, pp. 1610–27. W.B. SaundersCompany, Philadelphia.
• Dn M, Ahmad RA, Aithal HP et al. 2014: Surgical management of supracondylar femur fracture in dog. İndian J of Canine Pract, 6 (2), 158-160.
• Fossum TW, 2013: Small Animal Surgery. 4th ed. Elsevier. Philadelphia, USA. pp: 1181-1185.
• Gill KK, Kumar A, Sangwan V, Anand A, Mahajan SK, Mohindroo J 2018: Comparative functional out come of supracondylar femora lfracture stabilized with cross and end threaded intramedullary pinning in dogs. IndianJournal of AnimalSciences.88(2): 161–169.
• Langley-Hobbs SJ, Carmichael S, McCartney W, 1996: Use of external fixators in the repair of femoral fractures in cats. J Small AnimPract, 37; 95-101.
• Lidbetter, D.A. and Glyde, M.R. 2000: Supracondylar femoral fractures in adult animals.Comp. Cont. Edu. Pract.Vet.,22:1041-1045.
• Newton C D. 1985: Fractures of the femur.Textbook of Small Animal Orthopaedics.pp. 428–30. (Eds.) Newton C D and Nunamaker D M. Lippincott, Philadelphia.
• Palmer RH, Aron DN, Purinton PT 1988. Relation ship off emoral intramedullary pin stothe sciatic nerve and gluteal muscles after retrograde and normogradeinsertion. VeterinarySurgery, 17: 65–70.
• Ramesh N, Anil M, Raghavender KBP, Gireesh Kumar V, Chandra Sekhar EL, Latha C 2018. A clinical study on the use of single ‘Arrow-pin’ technique for management of supracondylar femoral fractures in young dogs. Journal of Entomology and Zoology Studies 6: 1047-1050
• Rathnadiwakara RWMH, De Silva DDN, Suranji Wijekoon HM 2020. Treatment of supracondylar femoral fractures in Young cats and dogs using “Arrow Pin” technique. J Vet Med Animal Sci, 3: 1017-1022.
• Robinson A, 2000: Use of a Rush pin to repair fractures of the distal femur in cats. Veterinary Record, 146,429-432.
• Scotti S, Klein A, Pink J, Hidalgo A, Moissonnier P, Fayolle P, 2007: Retrograde placement of a novel 3.5 mm titanium interlocking nail for supracondylar and diaphyseal femoral fractures in cats. Vet Comp OrthopTraumatol, 20; 211-218.
• Simpson DJ, Lewis DD, 2003: Fracture of the femur. In: Slatter D, editor. Textbook of Small Animal Surgery. 3rd ed. Philadelphia, PA, USA: WB Saunders Company; pp. 2059-2089.
• Smith RN, (1969) Fusion of ossificationcentres in thecat. Journal ofSmallAnimalPractice 10, 523-530.
• Stigen, O. 1999: Supracondylar femoral fractures in 159 dogs and cats treated using a normograde intramedullary pinning technique. J. Small Anim. Pract., 40: 519-523.
• Sukhiani HR and Holmberg DL 1997: Ex Vivo BiomechancalComparison of Pin Fixation Techniques for Canine Distal Femoral Physeal Fractures. Veterinary Surgery. 26: 398-407.
• Syam, K.V., Venkateswaralu, B., SaradaAmma, T., Raji, T.A. and Ranjith, M. 2012: External skeletal fixation in combination with intramedullary pinning and cerclage wiring for the management of comminuted fracture of humerus in dog. Indian J. Canine Pract.,4: 54-55.
• Worth AJ, 2007: Management of fractures of the long bones of eight cats using external skeletal fixation and a tied-in intramedullary pin with a resin-acrylic bar. NZ Vet J , 55; 191- 197.
• Zahn K, Matis U, 2004: The clamp rod internal fixator - application and results in 120 small animal fracture patients. Vet Comp OrthopTraumatol, 17; 110-120.