It was pointed out to me that the evaluation chart on
the BCCA health page that attempts to compare hip scores
from a number of organizations and different countries
doesn’t stack up in real life. How exactly do the
different scores compare? Thus this article was born,
and a somewhat strange trip it has been. To save those
of you who are easily bored, I will cut to the chase and
present my conclusions first. Hip evaluation is
subjective. It depends on humans and as such is liable
to human error. First there is the person taking the
original X-rays, their skill and their patience with
positioning and technical knowledge in making those
X-rays. Then there is the consistency of the
evaluation. Go to a dog show for a four day weekend,
and see totally different line ups of winners at all
levels. It is subjective judgment. For sure some dogs
will consistently win more than others, but they will be
beaten at times too. Hip evaluation too is subjective.
That being said consistency is better than we might
expect. Still, if you have a dog that appears perfectly
sound, has a family of dogs with good hips and you get a
borderline or dysplastic evaluation, don’t just accept
it, reshoot and resubmit. Always go to a veterinarian
experienced at shooting hip X-rays rather than relying
on one who does one every year or so. However, if you
are looking to buy a dog and at least the parents do not
have some kind of adult health clearance, or if you want
to breed to a dog and it lacks hip evaluation, I am with
Dr. Corley of the Orthopedic Foundation for Animals (OFA),
you can pretty much bet that it failed to achieve a
normal hip evaluation. Caveat emptor.
Hip Dysplasia 101
Canine Hip Dysplasia (CHD) is broad term used to
describe malformations of the hip joint which can lead
to secondary joint diseases (degenerative joint disease
(DJD), arthrosis and (osteo)arthritis), pain and
lameness. The hip joint is described as a ball and
socket joint. The top of the thigh bone (the femur) has
a ball shaped protrusion which optimally fits snugly
into a corresponding depression in the pelvic bone.
This depression is called the acetabulum.
Strictly speaking CHD is not a single disease, and I
have always thought it would be more helpful to breeders
if the particular cause of the problem was described.
The major cause of CHD is subluxation of the
femoral head out of the acetabulum. This may be the
result of excessive laxity in the tendons holding the
bones together, or because the acetabulum and head of
the femur are poorly matched – the acetabulum is too
shallow. Poor quality cartilage lining the joint may
also exacerbate the condition causing the bones to grind
against each other and cause pain. CHD is hereditary
and a major gene is believed to be responsible. Having
a genetic marker may make all the hip evaluation methods
unnecessary. However, environment does play a role in
the development of pathology in dogs with poor hip
formation. Heritability relates the genetic basis of
the disease or trait (genotype) with what is actually
expressed or seen (phenotype). It is expressed as a
number between 0 and 1 or a percentage and the higher
the heritability the more the phenotype reflects the
genotype, and the greater effect selection can have in
eradicating a problem.
The severity of the radiographic changes does not
correlate to the degree of impairment the dog
experiences. Some dogs with dysplasia may never show
clinical signs. The amount of stress to which the joint
is exposed, the dog’s weight, exercise – amount and
type, even the weather may influence clinical signs.
Dogs which are heavily muscles are less likely to show
signs of dysplasia because the muscles support the joint
and keep the bones tightly aligned; similarly small,
light weight dogs are far less likely to show signs even
if the joints look dreadful on X-rays. Lameness is most
often seen between 5-8 months or around 5 years of age.
Once degeneration of the hyaline cartilage lining the
hip joint begins it is self perpetuating. The initial
damage is caused by poor matching of ball to socket
causing rubbing. This damages cartilage, sometimes even
breaking pieces off. The damaged cartilage releases
enzymes that increase the breakdown of the cartilage and
also decrease formation of proteoglycans molecules that
are used to repair and make new cartilage. The
cartilage becomes less elastic and also thinner, so that
it provides less cushioning of the joint. Pieces of
cartilage and enzymes leak into the fluid filled capsule
between the two bones and destroy the glycosaminoglycans
(GAGs) and hyaluronic acid that are used to make more
cartilage in a healthy joint. Joint fluid acts like oil
to lubricate the joint and keep it moving freely, but in
the dysplastic joint fluid is depleted and loses the
ability to block inflammatory cells, which further
damage and inflame the joint. The synovial membrane
lining the joint is eroded exposing the nerve endings in
the bone beneath the cartilage. To increase joint
stability and reduce pain new bone is laid down along
the edges of the joint surface, within the joint capsule
and along ligament and muscle attachments – bone spurs.
This reduces the range of motion of the joint.
Assume the position
Diagnosis of CHD is based on X-ray findings in a large
scale screening of dogs. Radiographic technique has
been standardized worldwide. Optimally (it is required
by some agencies) the dog is heavily sedated or
anesthetized to ensure full muscle relaxation. It is
then laid on the table on its back (dorsal recumbency)
with the hind limbs extended behind it. The femurs are
parallel with each other, with the spine and the table
top. The patellae (knee caps) are centered over the
shafts of their respective femurs. This requires
rotating the patellae inward. The pelvis should appear
fully symmetric. Most organizations require that the
X-rays be permanently identified with the dog’s
registration and/or name, the name of the veterinarian
or hospital taking the X-ray, and the dog’s microchip or
tattoo number.
Pregnant, lactating or estrus bitches may have greater
hip laxity and X-rays should be taken one month after
the pups are weaned, or before estrus, and two to three
months after estrus. Inactive dogs may also have
increased laxity, and it is recommended that dogs be in
good physical condition – also important if you plan to
breed.
Diagnostic quality should be assessed by the evaluating
agency upon receipt and those X-rays unsuitable for
evaluation should be returned to the veterinarian to be
repeated. Problems can include poor position, an X-ray
that is too light or too dark, or which is blurred due
to movement of the animal.
The Orthopedic Foundation for Animals (OFA)
OFA is the primary screening organization in North
America, but they receive X-rays for evaluation from all
over the world. The X-rays are randomly assigned to
three board certified veterinary radiologists for
evaluation (there are 20 to 25 consulting radiologists
located throughout the USA both in private practice and
academia). Hips are evaluated considering breed, sex
and age. At least 9 areas of the hip are evaluated. The
front and back rims of the acetabulum, the top and
bottom acetabular margins, the head of the femur (ball
joint), the fovea capitus – a flattened area on the top
of the ball, the acetabular notch, the junction between
the head and neck of the femur (the stem that attaches
it to the rest of the bone) and the trochanteric fossa
(a depression between the neck and the other nubbin of
bone sticking up at the top of the femur. Each area is
examined for deviation from the breed normal and the fit
of femoral head in the acetabulum. Unlike other
evaluations, the Norberg angle (NA, see under BVA/KC) is
not measured. The hips collectively will be assigned to
one of seven different phenotypical (physical)
conformations. Three of these are normal (excellent,
good and fair), one borderline and three dysplastic
(mild, moderate or severe). Dogs rated normal are
assigned OFA numbers, and the information is placed on
the OFA website
www.offa.org . If they have a verified (by the
veterinarian taking the X-rays) identification – tattoo
or microchip – the data will be included on AKC
registration certificates for any offspring the dog
produces. While a report is generated on dogs assigned
other grades, unless the owner has chosen the option of
open database the score will not be made public, nor
will there be public record that the dog has been
evaluated.
Assignment is based on consensus, if two examiners
assign excellent and one good, the hips will be scored
excellent, if one says excellent another good and the
third fair, the hips would be assigned a good rating.
Excellent:
Superior hip conformation in comparison to other animals
of the same age and breed. Deep seated femoral head in
well formed acetabulum, the socket almost completely
covers the ball and there is minimal joint space.
Good:
Slightly less than superior, well formed hip joint,
ball congruent with socket and well covered.
Fair:
Minor irregularities in the hip joint. The hip joint is
wider than the good phenotype so that the ball slips
slightly out of the socket resulting in mild
incongruency. There may be a slight inward deviation of
the weight bearing surface of the socket, so that it
looks somewhat shallow (This finding is normal for some
breeds, but not Beardies.)
Borderline:
Usually more incongruency than the minimal amount seen
in the fair hip, but no arthritic changes that would
define the hip as dysplastic. Bony changes can not
definitively be described as arthritic changes as
opposed to normal anatomic variation in that particular
dog. Resubmission is recommended, usually in 6 months,
at which time the original X-ray will be compared to the
new one. In over 50% of dogs no changes will be
apparent and the hip will be assigned a normal, usually
fair, rating.
Mild:
Significant subluxation so the ball is partially out of
the socket. The acetabulum is usually shallow, only
partially covering the femoral head. There are usually
no arthritic changes, and if the dog is young 24-30
months it is advisable to resubmit X-rays when the dog
is older to track the change. CHD is a chronic,
progressive disease. Most owners probably follow the
dog with their own vet or orthopedist, however.
Moderate:
Significant subluxation with the femoral head barely
seated in the acetabulum. Secondary arthritic bony
changes are usually seen along the femoral neck and
head, bone spurs, and changes in bone structure –
sclerosis - are also common.
Severe:
Marked dysplasia with the femoral head partly or
completely out of the shallow acetabulum. There are
large amounts of secondary arthritic change as described
above.
It should be noted that until the 90s the criteria for
the 7 categories were not precisely defined and scoring
was left entirely to the examiner’s discretion.
Reports will also include other findings that might be
inherited including transitional vertebrae and
spondylosis. Transitional vertebrae are malformations
of the spine occurring between the major divisions most
commonly lumbosacral, but sometimes thoracolumbar. The
last lumbar vertebra has anatomical characteristics of
the sacrum. Transitional vertebrae rarely produce
clinical signs and dogs can be used for breeding,
although it is recommended they are not bred to other
dogs with transitional vertebrae. Spondylosis is the
production of smooth new bone between the vertebrae, and
ranges from small bone spurs to complete bridging.
Sometimes it is caused by spinal instability, but
generally no cause is found and it usually does not
produce clinical signs. It should not preclude use of
the dog for breeding, but is thought to be inherited.
OFA looked at 1.8 million X-rays evaluations by 45
radiologists, and found that 94.9% of the time all three
radiologists agreed the hip should be scored normal,
borderline or dysplastic. The exact designation –
excellent, good, fair, borderline, mild, moderate or
severe – was agreed upon 73.5% of the time. Two
radiologists agreed on the score and the third differed
by one grade 21% of the time. Two radiologists agreed
and the third was within 2 grades of that designation
5.4% of the time. This is good for a subjective
assessment. OFA will only assign a number to dogs older
than 24 months, and accuracy improves as the dog ages
and arthritic changes become more apparent. Preliminary
hip evaluation will be performed on X-rays submitted on
puppies 4 months and older but less than 24 months.
Evaluation is performed in-house by OFA’s own
radiologists and not sent out. Accuracy compared to
adult evaluation improves the closer the puppy is to 24
months. Pups receiving a preliminary excellent
evaluation were all (100%) deemed normal (excellent,
good or fair) as adults. Percentages for preliminary
good was 97.9% and for fair 76.9%. Reliability for 3-6
month puppies was 89.6%, 7-12 months 93.8% and 13-18
months 95.2%.
Bearded Collies currently rank 117th on the
OFA breed list (although this includes non AKC breeds
and even some cats). Of 4040 dogs evaluated 15.3% were
assessed excellent and only 6.1% dysplastic. This
suggests a clear improvement from when I first entered
the breed over 20 years ago. My skeptical side wonders
though how many X-rays are not submitted because the
referring vet reads the X-ray as dysplastic? We cannot
really know what the true incidence of CHD is in the
breed. The AKC has no requirement of OFA or other hip
evaluation for breeding stock.
Because three board certified radiologists evaluate the
X-rays it is unlikely that a problem with the hips will
be missed. OFA offers extensive advice to breeders on
selecting dogs for breeding, and the website includes
easy access to information on parents, siblings and
half-siblings tested. However, participation is
strictly voluntary.
BVA/KC
The British Veterinary Association/Kennel Club scoring
method is used in Britain, Ireland, Australia and New
Zealand to score each hip joint separately based on the
severity of changes in 9 specific morphologic
radiographic criteria – see below. Each criterion is
scored from 0 (ideal) to 6 (worst). The final score is
given between 0 and 53 for each hip or a total of 0-106
for the two combined. The scoring is done by three
board certified radiologists or small animal surgeons
from an available panel.
Norberg Angle (NA):
gives a measured assessment of several features: the
degree of congruence between the femoral head (FH) and
acetabulum; the length of the cranial acetabular edge (CrAE)
which gives a relative indication of acetabular depth
and a measure of coxofemoral subluxation (laxity). A
line is drawn between the centers of the two femoral
heads (FHC) and a second line from each FHC to the
junction between the dorsal and cranial acetabular
edges. In normal hips this will be 105o or
more.
Subluxation (SL):
is based principally on the level of congruence between
the FH and acetabulum. The general fit is assessed by
the relationship between the FHC and the underlying
image of the dorsal acetabular edge (DAE). The cranial
joint space is seen as a shadow between the CrAE and
adjacent cranial articular margin of the FH.
Cranial acetabular edge (CrAE):
minor alterations in the shape, contour and possibly
length of CrAE are indicators or poor articular
congruence; more severe changes are consequences of
chronic instability, marginal wear and joint remodeling.
Dorsal acetabular edge (DAE):
the DAE traverses the FH almost vertically and extends
beyond it slightly cranially and caudally forming a well
defined interface. Its clarity varies markedly depending
on radiographic technique.
Score/ parameter |
NA (o) |
Subluxation |
CrAE |
DAE |
0 |
105 & over |
Femoral head well centered in acetabulum |
Even curve, parallel to FH throughout |
DAE has slight curve |
1 |
100-104 |
FHC lies medial to DAE. Lateral or medial joint
space increases slightly |
Lateral or medial ¼ CrAE flat and lateral or
medial joint spaces diverge slightly |
Loss of S curve only in the presence of other
dysplastic change |
2 |
95-99 |
FHC superimposed on DAE. Medial joint space
increase obvious |
CrAE flat throughout most of its length |
Very small exostosis on cranial DAE |
3 |
90-94 |
FHC just lateral to DAE. ½ FH within acetabulum |
CrAE slight bilabiation |
Obvious exostosis on DAE especially cranially
and/or minor “loss of edge” |
4 |
85-89 |
Femoral head centre clearly lateral to DAE. ¼
femoral head within acetabulum |
CrAE moderate bilabiation |
Exostosis well lateral to DAE and/or moderate
“loss of edge” |
5 |
84-80 |
Femoral head centre well lateral to DAE.
Femoral head just touches DAE |
CrAE gross bilabiation |
Marked exostosis all along DAE and/or gross
“loss of edge” |
6 |
79 and less |
Complete pathological dislocation |
Entire CrAE slopes cranially |
Massive exostosis from cranial to caudal DAE |
Cranial effective acetabular margin (CrEAM):
Earliest detectable abnormalities are minor exostosis,
which may be seen as slight rounding of the junction
between CrAE and DAE.
Acetabular Fossa (AF):
In unstable hips the AF and notch are sites of new bone
formation. Increased opacity and loss of distinct
margins around the caudomedial acetabulum gives an
impression of the amount of new bone, and loss or
partial obscuring of the normally clear shadow
represents increased fat. Detectable new bone is closely
associated with and parallels marked SL. Exact
assessment is hard, but in dogs where changes are seen
total scores will already be way above average.
Caudal acetabular edge (CdAE):
this segment of the acetabulum is subject to the widest
range of variation, and depends largely on the
pelvis/film angle as well as individual differences in
conformation, scored only 0 to 5; changes are mostly due
to exostosis together with signs of wear in advanced
cases.
FH and neck exostosis:
exostosis is the formation of new and abnormal bone on a
bone’s surface.
FH recontouring:
extent to which FH shape is altered as a result of
instability. Usually only seen in extreme cases, but
hard to evaluate numerically.
Score/
parameter |
CrEAM |
AF |
CdAE |
FH & neck exostosis |
FH recontouring |
0 |
Sharp clean cut junction of DAE & CrAE |
A fine bone line curves medial & caudal from
caudal end of CrAE |
Clean line |
Smooth rounded profile |
NIL |
1 |
Indistinct junction of DAE & CrAE |
Slight increase in bone density medial to AF.
“Fine line” hazy or lost |
Small exostosis at lateral CdAE |
Slight exostosis in “ring form” &/or dense
vertical line adjacent to the trochanteric fossa
(“Morgan Line”) |
FH does not fix in circle due to exostosis or
bone loss |
2 |
Very small exostosis or very small facet |
“Fine line” lost in AF & ventral AE hazy due to
new bone. Notch at CdAE clear |
Small exostosis at lateral & medial CdAE |
Slight exostosis visible on skyline &/or density
on medial femoral head |
Some bone loss &/or femoral head/neck ring of
exostosis |
3 |
Facet &/or small exostosis &/or slight
bilabiation |
Incomplete remodeling of acetabulum with edial
face lateral to AF. Ventral AE lost. AF hazy.
Notch irregular |
Large exostosis and narrow notch at CdAE |
Distinct exostosis in “ring” formation |
Obvious bone loss & distinct exostosis giving
slight conical appearance |
4 |
Obvious facet &/or obvious exostosis &/or
moderate bilabiation |
Marked remodeling. Medial face of acetabulum
clearly lateral to AF. Ventral AE lost. Notch
partly closed |
Marked exostosis and “hooking” of lateral end of
CdAE |
Obvious complete collar of exostosis |
Gross remodeling. Obvious bone loss & exostosis
gives mushroom appearance |
5 |
Gross exostosis &/or gross bilabiation |
Gross remodeling. Dense new bone throughout
acetabulum. CaAE notch lost and AF obscured |
Gross distortion due to mass of new bone in
acetabulum. Notch lost completely |
Massive exostosis giving mushroom appearance |
Very gross remodeling with marked bone loss and
much new bone |
6 |
Complete remodeling of CrEAR. Massive exostosis
&/or gross facet |
Complete remodeling and new articular surface,
well lateral to AF. Notch lost |
Void (no grade 6 for this parameter) |
Massive exostosis & infill of trochanteric fossa
and below FH |
FH is improperly shaped due to maldevelopment of
FHC |
Owners receive a report on their dog which gives the NA
for each hip, as well as the score for each criterion -
so it is easier to identify where there are problems,
and these scores are tallied to give the final score for
each hip. Heritability from the BVA/KC scheme is 70%
(estimated 30-50% depending upon country for FCI).
There is no translation of the numerical score into a
dysplasia grade, but the BVA recommends breeding dogs
with a score of 5 or less for each hip (10 combined) or
clearly below the mean score for the breed. Breed mean
score is listed and updated regularly on the BVA’s
website
www.bva.co.uk/public/documents/CHS_Hip_Scheme_Breed_Mean_Scores.pdf
Currently based on 2910 Beardies evaluated the BMS is 11
with a range from 0-79. Prior to 2000 the Australian KC
gave a grade as well as a numerical score, but this was
discontinued as it was found to be unreliable. Sadly,
many breeders in Australia and New Zealand still aren’t
testing hips on their dogs. In part this may be because
there is a scarcity of radiologists approved to evaluate
their X-rays. Like OFA the scheme is completely
voluntary. There are no Kennel Club restrictions as to
which dogs are used, even those that are severely
dysplastic. Many breeding dogs are still untested in
all these countries.
FCI
The Fédération Cynologique
Internationale is the umbrella organization for more
than 80 national kennel clubs in most European
countries, Russia, South America and Asia. Their
scientific committee described a 5 grade scoring system
from A (normal hip joint) to E (severe hip dysplasia).
The grades are defined descriptively based on the size
of the NA, degree of subluxation, shape and depth of the
acetabulum and signs of secondary joint disease. Over
the last 40 years many Western countries have
implemented mandatory radiographic hip evaluation as a
prerequisite for breeding. Dogs must be at least 1 year
of age for official scoring. Hips are usually scored by
a single examiner per breed club or within a country,
although there are some exceptions. Dogs with moderate
or severe CHD are barred from breeding in most
countries. There are usually specific breeding
restrictions for those with mild dysplasia. The FCI
classifications are based on evaluations of dogs between
12-24 months of age (certain breeds are assessed only
after 18 months). When older dogs are examined,
secondary arthritic changes are assessed with regard to
the dog’s age. Publication of results varies between
the individual breed clubs.
A:
No signs of HD. The femoral head and acetabulum
are congruent. The craniolateral acetabular rim appears
sharp and slightly rounded. The joint space is narrow
and even. The Norberg angle is about 105o.
In excellent hip joints the craniolateral rim encircles
the femoral head somewhat more in caudolateral
direction.
B:
Near normal hip joints. The femoral head and
acetabulum are slightly incongruent and the NA is about
105o OR the femoral head and the acetabulum
are congruent and the NA is < 105o.
C:
Mild HD. The femoral head and the acetabulum are
incongruent, the NA is about 100o and/or
there is slight flattening of the craniolateral
acetabular rim. No more than slight signs of
osteoarthrosis on the cranial, caudal or dorsal
acetabular edge or on the femoral head and neck may be
present.
D:
Moderate HD. There is obvious incongruity
between the femoral head and the acetabulum with
subluxation. The NA is > 90o (only as a
reference). Flattening of the craniolateral rim and/or
ostearthrotic signs are present.
E:
Severe HD. Marked dysplastic changes of the hip
joints, such as luxation or distinct subluxation are
present. The NA is < 90o. Obvious
flattening of the cranial acetabular edge, deformation
of the femoral head (mushroom shaped, flattening) or
other signs of osteoarthrosis are noted.
The individual breed club selects the person who
evaluates the X-rays. Training and competence varies
enormously from self trained veterinarians or in some
cases lay persons to highly skilled board certified
radiologists or small animal surgeons. Quality of
scoring varies accordingly and it can be extremely
difficult or impossible to compare grades between
countries. Within a single country each regional breed
club may have its own evaluator leading to inconsistency
within the same country. The best information on
evaluation is probably found on the website of the
Italian fondazione salute animale (FSA) –
http://www.fondazionesaluteanimale.it/CENTRALE/index.html
– it is not surprisingly in Italian. In general,
Western and Northern European countries employ
evaluators of a similar caliber to those used by other
systems.
For some of the many attempts to compare hip schemes in
Europe with OFA here is a small sample:
www.leonberger.com/Leo World/hd.html ;
www.ofbridgefour.com/UK/17_hip_system.htm ;
http://malinut.com/ref/library/hips
South Africa’s
Hip Scoring Scheme under KUSA (Kennel Union of South
Africa) according to FCI rules and regulations scores
each hip and gives an FCI grade. Prior to 2007 5 grades
were given 0 normal hips; 1 marginal to mild/moderate
dysplasia; 2 moderate to severe dysplasia; 3 severe
dysplasia; 4 very severe dysplasia. These remain
listed. There are 6 approved evaluators.
Ontario Veterinary College (OVC):
There is no official Canadian Kennel Club hip evaluation
scheme. Some breeders use OFA and some OVC. Hips
considered normal are classified normal/pass with no
further sub-grading. Those that do not pass, receive
grade I (least severe, roughly equivalent to OFA
borderline), grade 2 (mild dysplasia), grade 3 (moderate
dysplasia) or grade 4 (severe dysplasia).
Japan Animal Hereditary Disease Network (JAHD):
Until JAHD was established Japanese breeders had their
dogs’ hips evaluated by either OFA or BVA. Dogs must be
at least a year old and evaluation is by a point system
similar to, but different from, BVA. To find the
details go to their website
www.jahd.org/ but it
is in Japanese.
PennHIP (University of Pennsylvania Hip Improvement
Program):
As has been pointed out the majority of hip scoring
schemes rely upon primarily subjective evaluation of
X-rays, albeit mostly by skilled professionals with
board training. In most cases dogs should be at least
12 months old for reliable evaluation and in the
meantime breeders and owners spend money developing and
showing dogs that could be saved if they were known to
be dysplastic. Even worse, the numbers of dysplastic
dogs produced has only dropped relatively modestly and
we are a long way from eradicating this debilitating
problem. Enter PennHIP. Their goal was to produce an
evidence based technique with hard data. They train
each veterinarian and veterinary technician approved to
take the three X-ray views required, and they also
wanted a technique which could accurately identify
dysplastic dogs as young as 3 to 4 months.
PennHIP relies upon three different views of the hip (to
see typical X-rays go to
http://www.pennhip.org/ph_method.html). The
traditional X-ray hips extended view is used to look for
signs of DJD only. In this position the femur is pushed
into the acetabulum with the result that it can make
hips look much better than they are, particularly before
DJD sets in. The distraction view still has the dog
lying on its back, but the stifles are flexed and the
legs held out to either side by a forced distraction
device. This pulls the femur away from the acetabulum
as far as the hip construction allows. Laxity is 2.5 to
11 times that of the traditional view. Specially
machined circular gauges are placed over the X-ray to
match the cortical margin of the acetabulum and the
femoral head. The distance between the centers of these
two circles d is the joint laxity. Because d varies
with the size and age of the dog as well as the distance
of the dog from the film, this is corrected for by
dividing d by the radius of the circle covering the
femoral head r to give the Distraction Index (DI).
Ideally the centers of the circles would be identical
and the DI would be 0. DI has no units and can range
from 0 to 1 or more. The higher the DI is the looser
the hips are and the greater the risk of CHD. In the
compression view the femurs are positioned in a neutral,
stance-phase orientation and the femoral heads are
pushed fully into the sockets. The Compression Index
(CI) is measured in the same way as DI and measures hip
joint congruity – how good a match the FH and acetabulum
are. For proper evaluation of DI and CI the muscles
around the hip must be completely relaxed and can only
be evaluated in dogs that are deeply sedated or under
general anesthesia.
Papers evaluating PennHIP have been published in
refereed journals but originate from the lab that
developed the technique. They compared the accuracy of
evaluating hips at 4, 6, 12, 24 and 36 months between
standard OFA scoring scheme with a board certified
radiologist, measuring the Norberg angle and DI.
Compared to results obtained at 24 months the DI was
remarkably predictive at 4 and 12 months. OFA at 4
months was little better than random, and even at 12
months not felt to be clinically helpful. NA fared
better, but was not nearly as good as DI. To assess the
correlation between DI and the risk of developing DJD,
DI and DJD was compared in adult dogs. In a study or
142 German shepherd dogs, only one hip < 0.3 showed
signs of DJD (however the mean age of the dogs was only
20 months). All hips with a DI of 0.7 or greater showed
evidence of DJD. In a second study, dogs assessed at 4,
12 and 24 months of age were followed longitudinally to
see if they developed DJD. The study looked at the
predictive value of DI, NA, OFA score, weight and sex.
DI was the most significant prognostic factor for all
age groups and the strength of its predictive power
increased with age. For some breeds, such as
rottweilers, DI can be higher than 0.3 and the dog due
to other factors will be less prone to DJD than GSDs,
but the higher the DI these dogs have the more likely
they are to get DJD. For this reason, a core population
of members of the breed has to be established to
determine the maximum “safe” DI for the breed.
A study of 4 breeds evaluated by the OFA method (English
Setters, Portuguese water dogs, Chinese Shar-peis and
Bernese Mountain Dogs) showed mean direct heritabilities
of 0.17, 0.30. 0.31 and 0.30 respectively. Such figures
help explain why using OFA it has been hard to eradicate
CHD. By Contrast heritability for DI in GSDs and
Labrador retrievers is 0.50 and 0.60.
The PennHIP evaluation generates a confidential report
made directly to the owner. Each hip is evaluated with
DI and CI measurements, as well as for DJD, cavitation
and other changes. The PennHIP database is closed to the
public, although they are contemplating opening the
database for dogs with normal hips. (PennHIP is now
administered by ICG, International Canine Genetics,
which is owned by Synbiotics Corp.) PennHIP compiles
statistics by breed semi-annually from the data it has
collected. These are currently sent only to
participating PennHIP veterinarians, although if you ask
the researchers they will pass the data on. Currently
there are 50 Bearded Collies in the PennHIP database
with an average DI of 0.57, and range from 0.27 to
1.17. (The percentiles are: 25th: DI = 0.71; 50th: DI =
0.57; 60th: DI = 0.54; 75th: DI = 0.44.) For
comparison, my two Beardies that I ran PennHIP on back
in 1994, one at 82 months had a DI of 0.29 on both hips
and the other at 27 months was 0.38 on the right hip and
0.33 on the left. Both were OFA good.
Comparing methods:
There have been relatively few studies beyond those by
PennHIP assessing accuracy of a particular method or
comparing methods. I have already reported OFA’s
findings. A 2008 paper in Veterinary Radiology &
Ultrasound compared interobserver agreement in the
assessment of standard X-rays and its effect on
agreement in diagnosis of canine hip dysplasia and
routine FCI scoring. The research group was Belgian.
There were 9 experienced and 21 inexperienced
evaluators. With regard to whether the X-rays could be
assessed, 68% of the experienced but only 46.5% of the
inexperienced evaluators said they could. However,
consistency of evaluation was not good, one dog
receiving a range of FCI scores from excellent to
moderately dysplastic. The study questioned the
credibility of the FCI screening method for CHD as it is
applied in most European countries. A study, also
Belgian, in 2008 in the AVMA’s American Journal of
Veterinary Research compared OFA and BVA/KC databases on
the prevalence of CHD, and the relationship of CHD to
body weight and height. They found a very high
correlation between the ranking order and the percentage
of dysplastic dogs by breed between the two registries.
Not surprisingly they also found weight and height, but
particularly body mass index correlated with incidence
of CHD – big, heavy dogs are most likely to get CHD.
Conclusions:
While, with the exception of PennHIP and NA, most
methods used to assess hips structure are subjective,
the requirement to assess particular landmarks,
especially when assigning a point value to each,
increases the accuracy of evaluation and the likelihood
that abnormalities will be detected. These
abnormalities will more likely be found as the dog ages,
and so it is preferable that dogs be assessed or
reassessed once they have passed their second
birthdays. In order to significantly reduce the
incidence of CHD all or at least most breeders should
score their breeding dogs and also nonbreeding relatives
and then use that information to determine whether to
breed a dog and where. PennHIP probably has the
greatest potential for reducing the incidence of CHD,
but until we have a significant number of Beardies
assessed we can only guess at the safe DI for the breed.
Because three X-ray views are needed and the number of
trained evaluators relatively few, the cost far exceeds
that of other methods. Getting back to the initial
question of how the various hip scores compare the
answer is not exactly. Due to the subjectivity of
evaluation you can submit the same X-ray to the same
agency at different times (or take a new X-ray and
submit it) and get different evaluations, or the same
X-ray to different agencies and get very different
assessments. On the whole though, probably the best bet
is the chart from OFA (I have left off SV – which is
only for GSDs). However, the average OFA Beardie is
Good, while the average BVA Beardie is 11 (total), and I
would probably say A-1 and A-2 are the equivalent of OFA
excellent, B1 good, B-2 good to fair and C fair to
borderline!
OFA |
FCI (Europe) |
BVA (UK, Australia) |
Excellent |
A-1 |
0-4 (no > 3/hip) |
Good |
A-2 |
5-10 (no > 6/hip) |
Fair |
B-1 |
11-18 |
Borderline |
B-2 |
19-25 |
Mild dysplasia |
C |
25-35 |
Moderate dysplasia |
D |
36-50 |
Severe dysplasia |
E |
51-106 |
Glossary:
Cranial: towards the head.
Caudal: towards the tail.
Dorsal: towards the spine.
Ventral: towards the belly.
Medial: towards the midline
Lateral: away from the midline (towards the flank) |