English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Zendy Plus

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Zendy Tools

Zendy Open

The femoro-patellar-tibial joint is one of the most complex, with different structures that, altogether, keep the joint stability and functionality (Cook, 2010; de Rooster et al., 2010, Pozzi & Kim, 2010). Due to its big functional demand, the cranial cruciate ligament (CrCL) is the structure most frequently injured. The rupture of this ligament is of the most common causes of lameness in the dog and the resulting instability leads to the development of degenerative joint disease (DJD). Still today, the search for the ideal technique to treat CrCL rupture, with joint stabilization and prevention or minimization of DJD, persists. However, would joint stabilization be the only factor to be considered for the treatment of CrCL rupture and its sequels? Won't the effects of instability on the other structures deserve more investigation? Would the inflammatory response mediators be responsible for the looseness of the intra-articular graft or is it exclusively due to improper fixation or inadequate postoperatory?

Arthroscopic Follow-Up After Rupture of the Cranial Cruciateligament