2005Anatomia Histologia EmbryologiaRequires access

Morphometric and Structural Examination of the Collateral Ligaments of the Canine Elbow Joint

R. Koch, Miriam-Jasmin Hemmes, Wieland Meyer, H Waibl

Open publisher page 0 citations

Abstract

The aim of this study was to describe morphological differences between the lateral collateral ligament (LCL) and the medial collateral ligament (MCL) of the canine elbow joint. Forty forelimbs of 22 dogs (adult German shepherd dogs and shepherd mongrels) were dissected. The length and width of defined segments of the ligaments (i. e. total length, areas of origin and insertion, ‘free part’, ‘humeral part’, ‘antebrachial part’) were measured in extension (160°) and flexion (30°). Statistical analyses of the data were performed using the data analysis software SAS 8.0. In addition the collateral ligaments of ten forelimbs of five shepherd mongrels were studied histologically. The LCL differs from the MCL in the following morphological items: a) the areas of origin and insertion are larger and in consequence the ‘free part’ of the lateral ligament is shorter; b) the caudal crus of the LCL is fan‐shaped with a broad insertion area at the ulna whereas the caudal crus of the MCL remains slim; c) in the LCL the ‘humeral part’ varies in length depending on extended or flexed position of the joint, which is due to the spiral shape of the capitulum humeri; d) the microscopical structure of the LCL is organized less tightly; the collagen fibre bundles cross in varying angles. Referring to these details the LCL seems to allow and to limit a slight rotation of the forearm when the elbow joint is extremely flexed.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

The aim of this study was to describe morphological differences between the lateral collateral ligament (LCL) and the medial collateral ligament (MCL) of the canine elbow joint. Forty forelimbs of 22 dogs (adult German shepherd dogs and shepherd mongrels) were dissected. The length and width of defined segments of the ligaments (i. e. total length, areas of origin and insertion, ‘free part’, ‘humeral part’, ‘antebrachial part’) were measured in extension (160°) and flexion (30°). Statistical analyses of the data were performed using the data analysis software SAS 8.0. In addition the collateral ligaments of ten forelimbs of five shepherd mongrels were studied histologically. The LCL differs from the MCL in the following morphological items: a) the areas of origin and insertion are larger and in consequence the ‘free part’ of the lateral ligament is shorter; b) the caudal crus of the LCL is fan‐shaped with a broad insertion area at the ulna whereas the caudal crus of the MCL remains slim; c) in the LCL the ‘humeral part’ varies in length depending on extended or flexed position of the joint, which is due to the spiral shape of the capitulum humeri; d) the microscopical structure of the LCL is organized less tightly; the collagen fibre bundles cross in varying angles. Referring to these details the LCL seems to allow and to limit a slight rotation of the forearm when the elbow joint is extremely flexed.

Why it matters

A significance statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

The aim of this study was to describe morphological differences between the lateral collateral ligament (LCL) and the medial collateral ligament (MCL) of the canine elbow joint. Forty forelimbs of 22 dogs (adult German shepherd dogs and shepherd mongrels) were dissected. The length and width of defined segments of the ligaments (i. e. total length, areas of origin and insertion, ‘free part’, ‘humeral part’, ‘antebrachial part’) were measured in extension (160°) and flexion (30°). Statistical analyses of the data were performed using the data analysis software SAS 8.0. In addition the collateral ligaments of ten forelimbs of five shepherd mongrels were studied histologically. The LCL differs from the MCL in the following morphological items: a) the areas of origin and insertion are larger and in consequence the ‘free part’ of the lateral ligament is shorter; b) the caudal crus of the LCL is fan‐shaped with a broad insertion area at the ulna whereas the caudal crus of the MCL remains slim; c) in the LCL the ‘humeral part’ varies in length depending on extended or flexed position of the joint, which is due to the spiral shape of the capitulum humeri; d) the microscopical structure of the LCL is organized less tightly; the collagen fibre bundles cross in varying angles. Referring to these details the LCL seems to allow and to limit a slight rotation of the forearm when the elbow joint is extremely flexed.

Key concepts: Anatomy, Elbow, Ligament, Medial collateral ligament, Ulna, Joint (building), Medicine, Forearm

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Morphometric and Structural Examination of the Collateral Ligaments of the Canine Elbow Joint — Research Paper | ScholarLens