Abstract Objective To determine the accuracy and safety of two established landmark‐based techniques and two novel techniques for stifle arthrocentesis in dogs. Study design Ex vivo prospective study. Animals A total of 32 paired canine cadaver pelvic limbs. Methods An electronic survey assessed technique prevalence among surgeons. Pelvic limbs ( n = 32) were randomized to one of four techniques; lateral intercondylar notch (LINC), infrapatellar (INFRA), suprapatellar (SUPRA), or proximal lateral parapatellar pouch (POUCH) technique, with n = 8 per group. Repositions, attempts, and synovial fluid presence were recorded. Stifle arthrography assessed accuracy. India ink assay assessed iatrogenic articular cartilage injury (IACI). Omnibus tests were used ( p .9). INFRA and SUPRA required more needle repositions (median 3 and 2, respectively) than LINC and POUCH (median 1 for both), ( p = .001). LINC and SUPRA produced no IACI, INFRA (6/8, 75%) and POUCH (3/8, 37.5%) ( p = .007). Over half of IACI produced with INFRA exceeded 10 mm 2 in area, all on weightbearing cartilage ( p = .041). POUCH injuries occurred exclusively on non‐weightbearing cartilage ( p = .041). Conclusion LINC and INFRA are currently used clinically and were accurate; however, INFRA required increased repositions and had high IACI rates on weightbearing cartilage. Two novel techniques were feasible and accurate; SUPRA was safe with no IACI, while POUCH had high IACI risk on non‐weightbearing cartilage. Clinical significance SUPRA may be a safer alternative than current established techniques and warrants further clinical investigation. INFRA carries high IACI rates.
McNally et al. (Sun,) studied this question.