Non-invasive methods to assess muscle function in dogs: A scoping review

Skeletal muscle function can be affected by multiple disorders in dogs of which cranial cruciate ligament rupture or disease (CCLD) is one of the most common. Despite the significance of this condition only sparse research exists regarding assessment of muscle function in dogs. This scoping review aimed to identify the non-invasive methods for canine muscle function assessments that have been reported in the literature in the past 10 years. A systematic literature search was conducted 1st March 2022 across six databases. After screening, 139 studies were considered eligible for inclusion. Among the included studies, 18 different muscle function assessment categories were identified, and the most frequently reported disease state was CCLD. We included an attempt to elucidate the clinical applicability of the 18 reported methods, as experts were asked to subjectively assess the methods for their clinical relevance as well as their practical applicability in dogs with CCLD.

Displacement of center of mass in dogs in response to foot sensory stimulation

OBJECTIVE

Evaluate center of mass (CoM) displacement values during four-limb and three-limb standing with limb suspension in dogs before and after applying sensory stimulation to a forelimb or hindlimb.

STUDY DESIGN

Experimental study.

ANIMALS

Six clinically normal beagles.

METHODS

A four force-plate apparatus was built to assess static weight distribution. Dogs stood on the device with one limb in contact with each force plate. We created a plastic device to induce sensory stimulation so that lameness could not be detected visually when stimulating the paw. Experimenters confirmed the degree of lameness by walking before and after measurement. Body-weight shifts were induced via suspension of each limb and transient sensory stimulation to the right forelimb or left hindlimb. CoMs of five postures were compared, with and without transient sensory stimulation.

RESULTS

The four-limb CoM was located cranial to the center of the X- and Y-axis coordinates (X: -0.82 ± 9.12, Y: 61.00 ± 5.82). During three-limb standing with suspension of either forelimb, CoM shifted backward toward the contralateral side compared to four-limb standing. During hindlimb suspension, CoM shifted to the contralateral side. With right forelimb sensory stimulation, there were large CoM changes for both four-limb and three-limb standing (X: -34.53 ± 9.09, Y: 52.21 ± 6.88). CoM changes were small with left hindlimb sensory stimulation (X: 6.47 ± 13.86, Y: 69.41 ± 5.55).

CONCLUSION

CoMs during four-limb and three-limb standing were influenced by sensory stimulation of a forelimb and, to a lesser extent, of a hindlimb.

CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE

Static evaluation of CoM may aid clinicians in the diagnosis and recovery of forelimb lameness.

Kinematic adaptions to induced short-term pelvic limb lameness in trotting dogs

Background

Lameness due to paw injuries is common in the clinical practice. Although many studies investigated gait adaptations to diseases or injuries, mainly of the hip and knee, our understanding of the biomechanical coping mechanisms that lame dogs utilize is limited. Therefore, this study evaluated the kinematic changes associated with an induced, load-bearing pelvic limb lameness in healthy dogs trotting on a treadmill. Kinematic analysis included spatio-temporal comparisons of limb, joint and segment angles of all limbs. Key parameters compared between sound and lame conditions were: angles at touch-down and lift-off, minimum and maximum joint angles and range of motion.

Results

Significant differences were identified in each limb during both stance and swing phases. The most pronounced differences concerned the affected pelvic limb, followed by the contralateral pelvic limb, the contralateral thoracic limb and, to the least degree, the ipsilateral thoracic limb. The affected limb was retracted more, while the contralateral limb was protracted more, consistent with this limb bearing more body weight in lame dogs.

Conclusions

Kinematic adaptations involved almost all segment and joint angles in the pelvic limbs, while they exclusively concerned distal parts of the thoracic limbs. Comparisons with tripedal locomotion reveal several striking similarities, implying that dogs use similar principles to cope with a partial or a total loss in limb function. Because kinematic alterations occurred in all limbs and not just the affected one, all limbs should be included in routine follow-ups and be part of the diagnostic and therapeutic care of canine patients.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12917-018-1484-2) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

The effect of limb amputation on standing weight distribution in the remaining three limbs in dogs

Despite the fact that limb amputation is a commonly performed procedure in veterinary medicine, quantitative data regarding outcomes are lacking. The intention of this study was to evaluate the effect of limb amputation on weight distribution to the remaining three limbs at a stance in dogs. Ten dogs with a prior forelimb amputation and ten dogs with a prior hindlimb amputation; all of which had no history of orthopaedic or neural disease in the remaining three limbs were included in the study. Standing weight bearing was evaluated with a commercial stance analyzer in all dogs. Five valid trials were obtained and a mean percentage of weight bearing was calculated for each remaining limb. The dogs with a previous forelimb amputation, and also those with a previous hindlimb amputation, had the largest mean increase in weight bearing in the contra -lateral forelimb. In conclusion, proactive monitoring of orthopaedic disease in the contralateral forelimb may be advisable in dogs with a previous limb amputation. In addition, when determining candidacy for a limb amputation, disease of the contralateral forelimb should be thoroughly evaluated.

Supplementary Material to this article is available online at https://doi.org/10.3415/VCOT-16-05-0075