← Articles

Cruciani et al: A modified approach to portal placement for arthroscopic management of osteochondritis dissecans lesions of the tarsocrural joint in 15 dogs (19 tarsi)
Veterinary Surgery 1, 2025

🔍 Key Findings

  • Study Design: Retrospective case series of 15 dogs (19 tarsi) with talar OCD.
  • Technique: Modified arthroscopic approach with both scope and instrument portals on the same side as the lesion.
  • Outcomes:
    • Good to excellent mid-to-long-term outcomes in 11/14 dogs.
    • Statistically significant improvement in CBPI (p < .05) and VAS scores (p < .05).
    • Minor postoperative complications (synovial cysts) in 4/13 tarsi, all resolved spontaneously.
    • No major intraoperative complications; 1/19 required mini-arthrotomy due to fragment size.
  • Degenerative Joint Disease (DJD): Progression noted in 10/14 cases, despite good functional outcomes.
  • Fragment Characteristics: Multiple osteochondral fragments were present in most cases, with 17/19 lesions on the medial talar ridge.
  • Technical Advantage: Lower conversion rate to arthrotomy (1/19) compared to previous studies (Gielen et al. and Miller & Beale).
A modified approach to portal placement for arthroscopic management of osteochondritis dissecans lesions of the tarsocrural joint in 15 dogs (19 tarsi)
A modified approach to portal placement for arthroscopic management of osteochondritis dissecans lesions of the tarsocrural joint in 15 dogs (19 tarsi)
A modified approach to portal placement for arthroscopic management of osteochondritis dissecans lesions of the tarsocrural joint in 15 dogs (19 tarsi)
A modified approach to portal placement for arthroscopic management of osteochondritis dissecans lesions of the tarsocrural joint in 15 dogs (19 tarsi)
A modified approach to portal placement for arthroscopic management of osteochondritis dissecans lesions of the tarsocrural joint in 15 dogs (19 tarsi)
A modified approach to portal placement for arthroscopic management of osteochondritis dissecans lesions of the tarsocrural joint in 15 dogs (19 tarsi)
A modified approach to portal placement for arthroscopic management of osteochondritis dissecans lesions of the tarsocrural joint in 15 dogs (19 tarsi)
A modified approach to portal placement for arthroscopic management of osteochondritis dissecans lesions of the tarsocrural joint in 15 dogs (19 tarsi)
A modified approach to portal placement for arthroscopic management of osteochondritis dissecans lesions of the tarsocrural joint in 15 dogs (19 tarsi)
A modified approach to portal placement for arthroscopic management of osteochondritis dissecans lesions of the tarsocrural joint in 15 dogs (19 tarsi)
A modified approach to portal placement for arthroscopic management of osteochondritis dissecans lesions of the tarsocrural joint in 15 dogs (19 tarsi)
A modified approach to portal placement for arthroscopic management of osteochondritis dissecans lesions of the tarsocrural joint in 15 dogs (19 tarsi)
A modified approach to portal placement for arthroscopic management of osteochondritis dissecans lesions of the tarsocrural joint in 15 dogs (19 tarsi)
A modified approach to portal placement for arthroscopic management of osteochondritis dissecans lesions of the tarsocrural joint in 15 dogs (19 tarsi)

Simini Surgery Review Podcast

How critical is this paper for crushing the Boards?

🚨 Must-know. I’d bet on seeing this.

📚 Useful background, not must-know.

💤 Skip it. Doubt it’ll ever show up.

Thanks for the feedback!
‍We'll keep fine-tuning the articles vault.
Oops — didn’t go through.
‍Mind trying that again?
← Articles

Cruciani et al: A modified approach to portal placement for arthroscopic management of osteochondritis dissecans lesions of the tarsocrural joint in 15 dogs (19 tarsi)
Veterinary Surgery 1, 2025

🔍 Key Findings

  • Study Design: Retrospective case series of 15 dogs (19 tarsi) with talar OCD.
  • Technique: Modified arthroscopic approach with both scope and instrument portals on the same side as the lesion.
  • Outcomes:
    • Good to excellent mid-to-long-term outcomes in 11/14 dogs.
    • Statistically significant improvement in CBPI (p < .05) and VAS scores (p < .05).
    • Minor postoperative complications (synovial cysts) in 4/13 tarsi, all resolved spontaneously.
    • No major intraoperative complications; 1/19 required mini-arthrotomy due to fragment size.
  • Degenerative Joint Disease (DJD): Progression noted in 10/14 cases, despite good functional outcomes.
  • Fragment Characteristics: Multiple osteochondral fragments were present in most cases, with 17/19 lesions on the medial talar ridge.
  • Technical Advantage: Lower conversion rate to arthrotomy (1/19) compared to previous studies (Gielen et al. and Miller & Beale).

Simini Surgery Review Podcast

Join Now to Access Key Summaries to more Veterinary Surgery Articles!
Log InSign Up

Multiple Choice Questions on this study

In Cruciani 2025 et al., on portal placement, what was the most common complication following surgery?

A. Surgical site infection
B. Septic arthritis
C. Nerve damage
D. Synovial cyst formation
E. Incomplete fragment removal

Answer: Synovial cyst formation

Explanation: Synovial cysts occurred in 4 of 13 dogs with follow-up data; all were considered minor complications.
In Cruciani 2025 et al., on portal placement, what functional outcome was observed in most dogs at long-term follow-up?

A. Persistent lameness in >50%
B. Return to normal function in all cases
C. Acceptable or full function in majority
D. Unacceptable function in most
E. Marked improvement only after second surgery

Answer: Acceptable or full function in majority

Explanation: 11 of 14 dogs had full or acceptable function at long-term follow-up.
In Cruciani 2025 et al., on portal placement, which pain scoring tool showed significant postoperative improvement?

A. SF-36
B. CBPI
C. PennHIP
D. Glasgow CMPS
E. LOAD

Answer: CBPI

Explanation: Canine Brief Pain Inventory (CBPI) scores significantly improved from pre-op to final follow-up.
In Cruciani 2025 et al., on portal placement, what was the primary reason for modifying the arthroscopic portal?

A. To shorten surgical time
B. To avoid neurovascular structures
C. To improve cosmetic appearance
D. To improve fragment access and removal
E. To minimize cartilage trauma

Answer: To improve fragment access and removal

Explanation: Placing the portal on the same side as the lesion facilitated easier removal of osteochondral fragments.
In Cruciani 2025 et al., on portal placement, how often was complete fragment removal achieved?

A. 19 of 19 cases
B. 15 of 19 cases
C. 13 of 19 cases
D. 10 of 19 cases
E. 17 of 19 cases

Answer: 17 of 19 cases

Explanation: Complete removal was achieved in 17 of 19 joints using the modified ipsilateral portal technique.

Elevate Your Infection Control Protocol

Implement Simini Protect Lavage for superior, clinically-proven post-operative skin antisepsis and reduced infection risk.

Start Your Free Trial TodayStart Your Free Trial

Review More Key Summaries from this Veterinary Surgery Journal Issue

Whitney

 et al: 

Ex vivo biomechanical comparison of four Center of Rotation Angulation Based Leveling Osteotomy fixation methods

Young

 et al: 

Surgical description and outcome of ultrasound‐guided minimally invasive parathyroidectomy in 50 dogs with primary hyperparathyroidism

Latifi

 et al: 

Fascial plane mapping for superficial tumor resection in dogs. Part II: Forelimb

Wilson

 et al: 

Evaluation of three acetabular measurement methods for total hip replacement in dogs

Longo

 et al: 

Minimally invasive tarsal arthrodesis in 15 dogs