Assessment of potential maladaptive pain in dogs with elbow osteoarthritis using a von Frey aesthesiometer.
dogs
elbow osteoarthritis
maladaptive pain
mechanical sensory threshold
pain assessment
von Frey aesthesiometer
Journal
The Veterinary record
ISSN: 2042-7670
Titre abrégé: Vet Rec
Pays: England
ID NLM: 0031164
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
04 Apr 2024
04 Apr 2024
Historique:
revised:
11
12
2023
received:
15
10
2023
accepted:
15
02
2024
medline:
5
4
2024
pubmed:
5
4
2024
entrez:
4
4
2024
Statut:
aheadofprint
Résumé
This study aimed to investigate the possible presence of maladaptive pain in the thoracic limbs of dogs with elbow osteoarthritis (OA) using an electronic von Frey aesthesiometer (eVFA). Twenty-eight client- and staff-owned dogs (OA, n = 14; controls, n = 14) were enrolled in the study. Every dog underwent a full orthopaedic examination, and then five von Frey measurements were obtained from each carpal pad of each dog. A maximum test threshold of 400 g was set and approved by an ethics committee. eVFA thresholds were significantly lower (p < 0.001) in dogs with OA (median 248 g, range 128-369 g) than in control dogs (median 390 g, range 371-400 g). In the OA group, the sensory threshold was significantly lower (p = 0.048) in the more severely affected limb than the less severely affected limb. The low maximum threshold required for ethical approval may influence the variability in the control group. Dogs with elbow OA had significantly lower sensory thresholds than control dogs, which is compatible with the presence of maladaptive pain, potentially due to central sensitisation. Further research is required to evaluate the potential use of the eVFA for monitoring clinical progression and treatment response in dogs with elbow OA.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
This study aimed to investigate the possible presence of maladaptive pain in the thoracic limbs of dogs with elbow osteoarthritis (OA) using an electronic von Frey aesthesiometer (eVFA).
METHODS
METHODS
Twenty-eight client- and staff-owned dogs (OA, n = 14; controls, n = 14) were enrolled in the study. Every dog underwent a full orthopaedic examination, and then five von Frey measurements were obtained from each carpal pad of each dog. A maximum test threshold of 400 g was set and approved by an ethics committee.
RESULTS
RESULTS
eVFA thresholds were significantly lower (p < 0.001) in dogs with OA (median 248 g, range 128-369 g) than in control dogs (median 390 g, range 371-400 g). In the OA group, the sensory threshold was significantly lower (p = 0.048) in the more severely affected limb than the less severely affected limb.
LIMITATION
CONCLUSIONS
The low maximum threshold required for ethical approval may influence the variability in the control group.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
Dogs with elbow OA had significantly lower sensory thresholds than control dogs, which is compatible with the presence of maladaptive pain, potentially due to central sensitisation. Further research is required to evaluate the potential use of the eVFA for monitoring clinical progression and treatment response in dogs with elbow OA.
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
e4043Informations de copyright
© 2024 The Authors. Veterinary Record published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of British Veterinary Association.
Références
Hercock CA, Pinchbeck G, Giejda A, Clegg PD, Innes JF. Validation of a client‐based clinical metrology instrument for the evaluation of canine elbow osteoarthritis. J Small Anim Pract. 2009;50:376–387.
Glyn‐Jones S, Palmer AJR, Agricola R, Price AJ, Vincent TL, Weinans H, et al. Osteoarthritis. Lancet. 2015;386:376–387.
Pettitt RA, German AJ. Investigation and management of canine osteoarthritis. In Pract. 2015;37:1–8.
Brown DC, Boston RC, Coyne JC, Farrar JT. Ability of the Canine Brief Pain Inventory to detect response to treatment in dogs with osteoarthritis. J Am Vet Med Assoc. 2008;233:1278–1283.
Capon H. Understanding the pharmaceutical approach to pain management in canine osteoarthritis. Companion Anim. 2021;26:73–80.
Wells JR, Young AL, Crane A, Moyaert H, Michels G, Wright A. Linguistic validation of the Canine Brief Pain Inventory (CBPI) for global use. Front Vet Sci. 2021;8:769112.
Hielm‐Björkman AK, Rita H, Tulamo R‐M. Psychometric testing of the Helsinki chronic pain index by completion of a questionnaire in Finnish by owners of dogs with chronic signs of pain caused by osteoarthritis. Am J Vet Res. 2009;70:727–734.
Walton MB, Cowderoy E, Lascelles D, Innes JF. Evaluation of construct and criterion validity for the ‘Liverpool Osteoarthritis in Dogs’ (LOAD) clinical metrology instrument and comparison to two other instruments. PLoS One. 2013;8:e58125.
Mathews K, Kronen PW, Lascelles D, Nolan A, Robertson S, Steagall PV, et al. Guidelines for recognition, assessment and treatment of pain. J Small Anim Pract. 2014;55:E10–E68.
Neogi T. The epidemiology and impact of pain in osteoarthritis. Osteoar Cartil. 2013;21:1145–1153.
Hunt JR, Goff M, Jenkins H, Harris J, Knowles TG, Lascelles BDX, et al. Electrophysiological characterisation of central sensitisation in canine spontaneous osteoarthritis. Pain. 2018;159:2318–2330.
Woolf CJ. Central sensitization: implications for the diagnosis and treatment of pain. Pain. 2011;152:S2–S15.
Mease PJ, Hanna S, Frakes EP, Altman RD. Pain mechanisms in osteoarthritis: understanding the role of central pain and current approaches to its treatment. J Rheumatol. 2011;38:1546–1551.
Arendt‐Nielsen L. Pain sensitisation in osteoarthritis. Clin Exp Rheumatol. 2017;35:S68–S74.
Lluch E, Torres R, Nijs J, Van Oosterwijck J. Evidence for central sensitization in patients with osteoarthritis pain: a systematic literature review. Eur J Pain. 2014;18:1367–1375.
Rialland P, Otis C, Moreau M, Pelletier J‐P, Martel‐Pelletier J, Beaudry F, et al. Association between sensitisation and pain‐related behaviours in an experimental canine model of osteoarthritis. Pain. 2014;155:2071–2079.
Uddin Z, Macdermid JC. Quantitative sensory testing in chronic musculoskeletal pain. Pain Med. 2016;17:1694–1703.
Cunningham RM, Park RM, Knazovicky D, Lascelles BDX, Gruen ME. Assessment of sensory thresholds in dogs using mechanical and hot thermal quantitative sensory testing. J Vis Exp. 2021;176:e62841.
Brydges NM, Argyle DJ, Mosley JR, Duncan JC, Fleetwood‐Walker S, Clements DN. Clinical assessments of increased sensory sensitivity in dogs with cranial cruciate ligament rupture. Vet J. 2012;193:545–550.
Tomas A, Marcellin‐Little DJ, Roe SC, Motsinger‐Reif A, Lascelles BDX. Relationship between mechanical thresholds and limb use in dogs with coxofemoral joint OA‐associated pain and the modulating effects of pain alleviation from total hip replacement on thresholds. Vet Surg. 2014;43:542–548.
Moore SA, Hettlich BF, Waln A. The use of an electronic von Frey device for evaluation of sensory threshold in neurologically normal dogs and those with acute spinal cord injury. Vet J. 2013;197:216–219.
Addison ES, Clements DN. Repeatability of quantitative sensory testing in healthy cats in a clinical setting with comparison to cats with osteoarthritis. J Feline Med Surg. 2017;19:1274–1282.
Harris LK, Whay HR, Murrell JC. An investigation of mechanical nociceptive thresholds in dogs with hind limb joint pain compared to healthy control dogs. Vet J. 2018;234:85–90.
Clark CE. Letter to the editor—the PERT model for the distribution of an activity time. Oper Res. 1962;10:405–406.
Harris LK, Murrell JC, van Klink EGM, Whay HR. Influence of experimental protocol on response rate and repeatability of mechanical threshold testing in dogs. Vet J. 2015;204:82–87.
Arendt‐Nielsen L, Nie H, Laursen MB, Laursen BS, Madeleine P, Simonsen OH, Graven‐Nielsen T. Sensitization in patients with painful knee osteoarthritis. Pain. 2010;149:573–581.
Knazovicky D, Helgeson ES, Case B, Thomson A, Gruen ME, Maixner W, et al. Replicate effects and test–retest reliability of quantitative sensory threshold testing in dogs with and without chronic pain. Vet Anaesth Analg. 2017;44:615–624.
Kukanich B, Lascelles BDX, Papich MG. Assessment of a von Frey device for evaluation of the antinociceptive effects of morphine and its application in pharmacodynamic modelling of morphine in dogs. Am J Vet Res. 2005;66:1616–1622.
Kukanich B, Lascelles BDX, Papich MG. Use of a von Frey device for evaluation of pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of morphine after intravenous administration as an infusion or multiple doses in dogs. Am J Vet Res. 2005;66:1968–1974.
Knazovicky D, Helgeson ES, Case B, Gruen ME, Maixner W, Lascelles BDX. Widespread somatosensory sensitivity in naturally occurring canine model of osteoarthritis. Pain. 2016;157:1325–1332.
Sanchis‐Mora S, Chang YM, Abeyesinghe SM, Fisher A, Upton N, Volk HA, et al. Pregabalin for the treatment of syringomyelia‐associated neuropathic pain in dogs: a randomised, placebo‐controlled, double‐masked clinical trial. Vet J. 2019;250:55–62.
Briley JD, Williams MD, Freire M, Griffith EH, Lascelles BDX. Feasibility and repeatability of cold and mechanical quantitative sensory testing in normal dogs. Vet J. 2014;199:245–250.
Freire M, Knazovicky D, Case B, Thomson A, Lascelles BDX. Comparison of thermal and mechanical quantitative sensory testing in client‐owned dogs with chronic naturally occurring pain and normal dogs. Vet J. 2016;210:95–97.
Hunt J, Knazovicky D, Lascelles BDX, Murrell J. Quantitative sensory testing in dogs with painful disease: a window to pain mechanisms? Vet J. 2019;243:33–41.