Article Text

Short Communications
Treatment of 70 dogs with traumatic hip luxation using a modified transarticular pinning technique
  1. W. McCartney, MVB, DipECVS, DSAS (Orth), PhD, MRCVS,
  2. K. Kiss, DVM and
  3. F. McGovern, BSc
  1. North Dublin Orthopaedic Animal Hospital, 38 Warrenhouse Road, Baldoyle, Dublin 13, Ireland
  1. E-mail for correspondence info{at}

Statistics from

LUXATION of the hip is the most common joint luxation in dogs (Fox 1991, McLaughlin 1995). Treatment options are based on closed reduction (Beale and others 1991), or surgical reduction and stabilisation using intra-articular or extra-articular methods. The intra-articular techniques include toggle pin variations (Knowles and others 1953, Denny and Minter 1973, Demko and others 2006) or transarticular pinning (Bennett and Duff 1980, Duff and Bennett 1982, Hunt and Henry 1985), whereas the extra-articular techniques include de Vita pinning (Beale and others 1991) and extracapsular prosthesis (Johnson and Braden 1987, Meij and others 1992). This short communication describes an analysis of 70 cases of traumatic hip luxation in dogs treated with a modified transarticular pinning technique.

Seventy dogs were operated on for hip luxation between 2003 and 2009. A retrospective analysis of hip luxation case details was undertaken in conjunction with a telephone questionnaire survey of the owners; all 70 dogs had sufficient data for analysis. Dogs with underlying hip dysplasia or osteoarthritis did not have transarticular pinning performed as a treatment for hip luxation. Only cases in which an outcome assessment had been made using the owner questionnaire more than six months postoperatively were included. Two questions were asked in the questionnaire. For the first, ‘Is your dog stiff or lame at any time and if so can you grade it as frequent, intermittent or never?’, frequent was described as more than three times a day, intermittent as up to three times a week and never as no lameness or stiffness at anytime. For the second, ‘Are you satisfied with the outcome?’, there were two possible answers – ‘satisfied’ and ‘not satisfied’. On the basis of the owner's repsonses, the outcome was graded as failed, poor, good or excellent. The outcome grading was …

View Full Text

Request permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.