Differences in the topographical distribution of articular cartilage degeneration between equine metacarpo- and metatarsophalangeal joints.

REASONS FOR PERFORMING STUDY

The equine metacarpophalangeal (MCP) and metatarsophalangeal (MTP) joints, although having virtually the same geometrical appearance, differ in the prevalence of joint pathologies, such as osteochondral fragmentation, and in biomechanical behaviour. The recently developed cartilage degeneration index (CDI) technique offers a possibility to assess quantitatively differences in cartilage degeneration between these joints and to compare these with known differences in biomechanics and clinical observations.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the topographical distribution of articular cartilage degeneration across the proximal articular surface of the proximal phalanx (P1) in the equine fore- and hindlimb.

METHODS

In 24 distal hindlimbs from 24 horses, articular cartilage degeneration of the proximal articular surface of P1 was quantified using the CDI. Overall CDI value (CDI(P1)) and CDI values of 6 areas of interest were determined: the medial dorsal surface (mds), lateral dorsal surface (lds), medial central fovea (mcf), lateral central fovea (lcf), medial plantar surface (mps) and lateral plantar surface (lps). The joints were divided into 4 equally sized groups of increasing CDI(P1) values. From an existing CDI database of MCP joints, 24 joints were selected with matching CDI(P1) values to the MTP joints and CDI values for the same areas of interest were determined.

RESULTS

In both the MCP and MTP joints, highest CDI values were determined at the dorsal articular surfaces. Values were not significantly different between fore- and hindlimbs. In contrast to the MCP joint, CDI values at the plantar joint margin were significantly higher compared to CDI values in the central sites in the MTP joint. CDI values for the plantar surfaces of P1 were significantly higher than those for the palmar surfaces in the forelimb in joints with advanced stages of OA; and values for the central regions of P1 were significantly lower in the hindlimb compared with the forelimb in joints with severe OA.

CONCLUSIONS

In both fore- and hindlimbs, initial cartilage degeneration started at the dorsal articular margin of P1. There was a major difference in the spread of cartilage degeneration; in the forelimb both the central and palmar parts are about equally involved, whereas in the hindlimb the plantar parts were significantly more and the central parts significantly less involved. These differences can be linked to differences in biomechanical loading reported elsewhere.

POTENTIAL RELEVANCE

This study supports the hypothesis that differences in biokinematics between fore- and hindlimbs are associated with differences in the development of cartilage degeneration and other joint pathologies such as osteochondral fragmentation in the MCP and MTP joints. This information is indispensable for a better understanding of the dynamic nature and progression of these joint disorders and may be of help when monitoring the effects of therapeutic interventions and preventative measures.