Get access

Canine Intervertebral Disc Fenestration Using a Vacuum-Assisted Tissue Resection Device

Authors

  • Stephanie A. Thomovsky DVM MS Diplomate ACVIM (Neurology),

    1. Department of Veterinary Clinical Sciences, Purdue University School of Veterinary Medicine, West Lafayette, IN
    Search for more papers by this author
  • Rebecca A. Packer MS DVM Diplomate ACVIM (Neurology),

    Corresponding author
    1. Department of Basic Medical Sciences, Purdue University School of Veterinary Medicine, West Lafayette, IN
    • Department of Veterinary Clinical Sciences, Purdue University School of Veterinary Medicine, West Lafayette, IN
    Search for more papers by this author
  • Nicolaas E. Lambrechts BVSc MMedVet Diplomate ECVS,

    1. Department of Veterinary Clinical Sciences, Purdue University School of Veterinary Medicine, West Lafayette, IN
    Search for more papers by this author
  • George E. Moore DVM PhD Diplomate ACVPM & ACVIM

    1. Department of Comparative Pathobiology, Purdue University School of Veterinary Medicine, West Lafayette, IN
    Search for more papers by this author

Corresponding Author

Rebecca A. Packer, MS DVM Dipl ACVIM (Neurology), Department of Veterinary Clinical Sciences, Purdue University School of Veterinary Medicine, Lynn Hall, 625 Harrison Street, West Lafayette, IN 47907–2026

E-mail: rpacker@purdue.edu

Abstract

Objective

Describe the use and feasibility of a novel vacuum-assisted tissue resection device (VRD) for canine intervertebral disc fenestration, and compare the effectiveness of manual fenestration to the VRD.

Study Design

Randomized prospective study.

Animals

Canine cadavers (n = 15).

Methods

A cadaveric lumbar spine study was performed to compare the use of manual fenestration to a novel VRD for intervertebral disc fenestration. Both fenestration groups were compared to a control group. Effectiveness of fenestration was assessed by calculating a ratio of remaining nuclear weight postfenestration to total nuclear volume. Fenestrated discs with lower ratios were indicative of greater removal of nucleus pulposus.

Results

There was a statistically significant reduction in mean ratio (±SD) of remaining nuclear weight to volume with both fenestration groups compared to controls (0.39 ± 0.07; P < .001). There was an improved ratio using the VRD (0.23 ± 0.09) compared to manual fenestration (0.30 ± 0.10); this was not statistically significant (P = .069). It was technically difficult to fenestrate the disc spaces at L5-L6 and L6-L7 because of location and anatomy, resulting in a statistically significant increase in the median ratio of nuclear weight-to-volume ratios in both manual and VRD fenestration groups when compared to the more cranial L4-L5 disc spaces, 0.32 ± 0.08, and 0.35 ± 0.08 versus 0.25 ± 0.13 at L4-L5 (P = .026 and P = .004, respectively).

Conclusions

The VRD is a feasible instrument for canine intervertebral disc fenestration. It is at least as effective as manual fenestration, and provides additional safety features.

Get access to the full text of this article

Ancillary