Biomechanical evaluation of different plating techniques for feline ilial fracture gap stabilization : an ex vivo cadaveric study

Introduction: No studies have directly compared the accuracy of ultrasound and MRI for diagnosing medial meniscal pathology in dogs with CCL disease. Further, no assessment of ultrasound has been made when ultrasound is performed by a veterinary surgeon. Materials and Methods: A prospective clinical trial was performed in which 31 stifles in 26 dogs diagnosed with CCL disease had ultrasound, MRI, and arthroscopic evaluation of the medial meniscus of the affected stifles. Stifles were evaluated by one surgeon using physical examination, ultrasound, and arthroscopy for the presence of clinically relevant medial meniscal damage. Video recordings of the arthroscopy were saved and subsequently reviewed by a second arthroscopist that was blinded to all other assessments. A radiologist blinded to all other assessments evaluated MRI images acquired using a 1.5T scanner. The correct classification rate (CCR), sensitivity, and specificity of ultrasound and MRI were calculated twice using each of the two arthroscopists’ assessment as the standard. Results: The CCR of ultrasound was 84 and 90%, sensitivity was 86 and 95%, and specificity was 78 and 82% respectively. These same values for MRI were 77 and 84% CCR, 68 and 75% sensitivity, and 100 and 100% specificity. Discussion/Conclusion: These data are consistent with previous studies performed independently to assess ultrasound or MRI and suggest imperfect but clinically useful applicability of both ultrasound and MRI. These data also provide the first assessment of the accuracy of ultrasound when performed by a surgeon with limited ultrasound experience. Acknowledgement: Supported by Hitachi-Aloka and SCiL Animal Care.