Objective - To evaluate quantitative ultrasonography for objective monitoring of the healing process and prognostication of repair quality in equine superficial digital flexor (SDF) tendons. Animals - 6 horses with standardized surgical lesions in SDF tendons of both forelimbs. Procedures - Healing was monitored for 20 weeks after surgery by use of computerized ultrasonography. Pixels were categorized as C (intact fasciculi), B (incomplete fasciculi), E (accumulations of cells and fibrils), or N (homogenous fluid or cells). Four scars with the best quality of repair (repair group) and 4 scars with the lowest quality (inferior repair group) were identified histologically. Ratios for C, B, E, and N in both groups were compared. Results - During 4 weeks after surgery, lesions increased 2- to 4-fold in length and 10-fold in volume. Until week 3 or 4, structure-related C and B ratios decreased sharply, whereas E and N ratios increased. After week 4, C and B ratios increased with gradually decreasing E and N ratios. At week 12, C and B ratios were equivalent. After week 12, C ratio increased slowly, but B ratio more rapidly. At week 20, C ratio remained constant, B ratio was substantially increased, and E and N ratios decreased. Values for the inferior repair group were most aberrant from normal. Ratios for C differed significantly between repair and inferior repair groups at weeks 16 and 18 and for B beginning at 14 weeks. Conclusions and Clinical Relevance - Computerized ultrasonography provided an excellent tool for objective monitoring of healing tendons in horses and reliable prognostication of repair quality.

dx.doi.org/10.2460/ajvr.70.1.37, hdl.handle.net/1765/15071
American Journal of Veterinary Research
Erasmus MC: University Medical Center Rotterdam

van Schie, J.T.M, Bakker, E.M, Cherdchutham, W, Jonker, A.M, van Lest, C.H.A, & van Weeren, P.R. (2009). Monitoring of the repair process of surgically created lesions in equine superficial digital flexor tendons by use of computerized ultrasonography. American Journal of Veterinary Research, 70(1), 37–48. doi:10.2460/ajvr.70.1.37