54두 개에서 발생한 골반 골절의 임상적 분석

Clinical Analysis of Pelvic Fracture in 54 Dogs

  • 김경희 (건국대학교 수의과대학 수의외과학교실) ;
  • 이종훈 (건국대학교 수의과대학 수의외과학교실) ;
  • 윤헌영 (건국대학교 수의과대학 수의외과학교실) ;
  • 정순욱 (건국대학교 수의과대학 수의외과학교실)
  • 심사 : 2011.09.09
  • 발행 : 2011.10.31

초록

본 연구의 목적은 골반 골절을 지닌 54두의 환축의 임상적 결과를 분석하고 체중 지지까지의 기간, 입원 기 간, 수술 후 파행 등급 등을 평가하는데 있다. 54두의 환축에서 총 195 부위의 골절을 확인하였으며, 이중 47두에서는 2 부위 이상 골절이 확인되었다. 수술을 실시한 31마리에서 수술 이후 체중 지지까지 걸린 평균 기간은 7.04일이었으며, 평균 입원 기간은 16.39일이었다. 또한 수술 이후 평균 최종 파행 등급은 1.25 이었다. 천장골 탈구, 장골 골절, 관 골구 골절 간의 체중 지지 기간, 입원 기간, 최종 파행 등급에서 유의적 차이는 없었다. 수술을 2 부위 이상 실시한 경우와 양측 골반을 동시에 수술한 경우에서 입원 기간과 최종 파행 등급은 유의적인 증가를 보였다. 결론적으로 골 절의 위치보다 골절의 개수가 골절의 회복에 더 큰 영향을 주는 것으로 생각된다.

This study was conducted to describe clinical presentation of pelvic fracture and compare clinical outcomes of each part of pelvic fractures in 54 client-owned dogs. There was an average of 3.61 pelvic fractures per dog and 47 dogs had more than two fractures. The average time until initial weight-bearing on the affected leg, hospitalization after surgery, and lameness score at final check in 31 dogs that underwent surgery were 7.04 days, 16.39 days, and 1.25, respectively, and there were no significant difference in the incidence of sacroiliac luxation, iliac fracture, and acetabular fracture among them. The length of hospitalization and the lameness score upon final check of the dogs with over two surgically repaired sites were significantly longer and higher than those of the dogs with one surgically repaired site (P = .043 and P = .008, respectively). Upon final check of the dogs with bilateral pelvic fracture that was surgically treated, the hospitalization and lameness score were significantly longer and higher than those of dogs with unilateral pelvic fracture that was surgically treated (P = .034 and P = .033), respectively. The number of pelvic fractures treated surgically appears to be a more influential factor influencing recovery from pelvic fractures than the location of the pelvic fractures.

키워드

참고문헌

  1. Anson LW, DeYoung DJ, Richardson DC, Betts CW. Clinical evaluation of canine acetabular fractures stabilized with an acetabular plate. Vet Surg 1988; 17: 220-225. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1532-950X.1988.tb01001.x
  2. Boswell KA, Boone EG, Boudrieau RJ. Reduction and temporary stabilization of acetabular fractures using ASIF mandibular reduction forceps: technique and results using plate fixation in 25 dogs. Vet Surg 2001; 30: 1-10. https://doi.org/10.1053/jvet.2001.20328
  3. Bowlt KL, Shales CJ. Canine sacroiliac luxation: anatomic study of the craniocaudal articular surface angulation of the sacrum to define a safe corridor in the dorsal plane for placement of screws used for fixation in lag fashion. Vet Surg 2011; 40: 22-26. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1532-950X.2010.00761.x
  4. Brinker WO, Piermattei DL, Flo GL. Handbook of small animal orthopedics and fracture repair, 4th ed. Missouri: Saunders. 2006: 433-460.
  5. DeCamp CE, Branden TD. Sacroiliac fracture-separation in the dog: a study of 92 cases. Vet Surg 1985; 14: 127-130. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1532-950X.1985.tb00841.x
  6. Denny HR. Pelvic fractures in the dog: a review of 123 cases. J Small Anim Pract 1978; 19: 151-166. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1748-5827.1978.tb05470.x
  7. Denny HR, Butterworth SJ. A guide to canine and feline orthopaedic surgey, 4th ed. Oxford: Blackwell Science Ltd. 2000: 441-454
  8. Hamilton MH, Evans DA, Langley-Hobbs SJ. Feline ilial fractures: assessment of screw loosening and pelvic canal narrowing after lateral plating. Vet Surg 2009; 38: 326-333. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1532-950X.2009.00500.x
  9. Harasen G. Pelvic fractures. Can Vet J 2007; 48: 427-428.
  10. Innes J, Butterworth S. Decision making in the treatment of pelvic fractures in small animals. In Practice 1996; 18: 215-221. https://doi.org/10.1136/inpract.18.5.215
  11. Johnson AL, Dunning DD. Atlas of orthopedic surgical procedures of the dog and cat. 1st ed. Missouri: Elsevier saunders. 2005: 174-179.
  12. Lewis DD, Stubbs WP, Neuwirth L, Bertrand SG, Parker B, Stallings JT, Murphy ST. Result of screw/wire/polymethylmethacrylate composit fixation for acetabular repair in 14 dogs. Vet Surg 199; 26: 223-234. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1532-950X.1997.tb01489.x
  13. Ljunggren G. Fractures in the dog: a study of breed, sex, and age distribution. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1971; 81: 158-164. https://doi.org/10.1097/00003086-197111000-00025
  14. Olmstead ML. The pelvis and sacroiliac joint, In: Manual of Small Animal Fracture Repair and Management. Cheltenham: Br Small Anim Vet Assoc. 1998: 217-219.
  15. Phillips IR. A survey of bone fractures in the dog and cat. J Small Anim Pract 1979; 20: 661-674. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1748-5827.1979.tb06679.x
  16. Shales CJ, Langley-Hobbs SJ. Canine sacroiliac luxation: anatomic study of dorsoventral articular surface angulation and safe corridor for placement of screws used for lag fixation. Vet Surg 2005; 34: 324-331. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1532-950X.2005.00050.x
  17. Tomlinson JL, Cook JL, Payne JT, Anderson CC, Johnson JC. Closed reduction and lag screw fixation of sacroiliac luxations and fractures. Vet Surg 1999; 28: 188-193. https://doi.org/10.1053/jvet.1999.0188
  18. Tomlinson JL. Fractures of the pelvis. In: Textbook of small animal surgery, 3rd ed. Philadelphia: WB Saunders Co. 2003: 1989-2001
  19. Tonks CA, Tomlinson JL, Cook JL. Evaluation of closed reduction and screw fixation in lag fashion of sacroiliac fracture-luxations. Vet Surg 2008; 37: 603-607. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1532-950X.2008.00414.x