# Hip critique



## Konnie Hein (Jun 14, 2006)

I know next to nothing about hip x-rays. If the hips are obviously horrific, I suppose I'd pick up on that, but anything less and I'd have no clue. I depend heavily on an orthopedic vet to tell me what she thinks. I would like to learn more though.

Maybe we can post some anonymous hips and critique them for learning purposes?

Let's start with these - thoughts? I think this dog is around 18 mos. of age. How would you rate them? I was thinking the socket on the dog's left (on our right) is a bit shallow, but maybe it's the angle?


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen (Apr 7, 2006)

It is the angle. when I look at the hips, I look to see that everything looks even, and then adjust what I am looking at from there.

They do not look horrible, but I didn't see the breed mentioned.


----------



## Konnie Hein (Jun 14, 2006)

This particular x-ray is a Dutch Shepherd.

It does look a bit uneven.


----------



## ann schnerre (Aug 24, 2006)

i think it's a great idea Konnie, esp for those of us who know very little about hips xrays. and i think the above xray looks like the dog's twisted some, therefore affects what the L hip looks like. not a good image.


----------



## Konnie Hein (Jun 14, 2006)

Anybody else want to post x-rays for discussion?


----------



## Selena van Leeuwen (Mar 29, 2006)

The dog doesn't lay straight. for a good opinion it is necessary it lays straight.

But as far as I can see, hips are good round, deep and close enough in the sockets, no atrose.Probably an A rating (FCi), I think that equels an outstanding in OFA?

I have no digital x-rays only the old fashion ones.


----------



## Bob Scott (Mar 30, 2006)

One of the things I like to look at is the point of the pelvis that shows throught the leg bone. In that pic the one on the left of the pic is showing more then the one on the right.
Poor positioning!


----------



## Maren Bell Jones (Jun 7, 2006)

I've really hesitated in saying this because I know it'll probably come out wrong and probably step on some toes...but unless you really really understand the anatomy and the principles of radiology, have perfect positioning, and get a good digital copy up, the lay person isn't going to be able to say unless it's really pretty obvious. Even in med school, they don't get as much radiology as we do because a general practice physician passes most all radiographs off to a radiologist. There are less radiology specialists in veterinary medicine, so we have to understand more as a general practitioner. Even with a full year of anatomy under my belt, I still couldn't tell you what that dog would get. We have radiology next semester and we supposedly have to look at hundreds of them before we get even remotely passable plus lots of review of the anatomy. And they aren't trying to make us into OFA or PennHip radiologists either. So unless the acetabulum is obviously not covering the femoral head, I wouldn't even venture a guess as to what the dog would "get" and I am not sure it's a great idea to. :-k Plus it helps to have digital, where you can better tell the contrast. Too bad digital radiography is like 250K. :-?


----------



## Konnie Hein (Jun 14, 2006)

Maren - that's relevant information. You didn't step on my toes :smile:

So overall, your opinion is that the best we can really say without getting into too much detail is that this dog has no obvious problems, right?

For non-breeding working dogs, shouldn't that be all that matters? Maybe even for breeding dogs too?


----------



## Mary Lehman (Oct 2, 2008)

Konnie, great topic. Here is another set of Xrays for people to take a look at.

I'm still learning how to use this forum so I attached the picture instead of inserting it.


----------



## Maren Bell Jones (Jun 7, 2006)

Konnie Hein said:


> Maren - that's relevant information. You didn't step on my toes :smile:
> 
> So overall, your opinion is that the best we can really say without getting into too much detail is that this dog has no obvious problems, right?
> 
> For non-breeding working dogs, shouldn't that be all that matters? Maybe even for breeding dogs too?


No worries! I almost didn't post cause I *really* don't mean to sound like I rock at radiology and all you mere mortals suck or anything, cause I don't rock at radiology and you all don't suck. :grin: I honestly don't think I can say whether or not I think the dog has no problems as it's medically related, as I'm still a student and even a DVM on a forum couldn't say without a full history and vet/patient/client relationship. Yeah, I'm a stick in the mud, I know. :wink:

There's a lot of subtlety as well. For example, if you don't have a real big film in front of you, you may not be able to see the little bone spicules that are associated with arthritis that have just as much, if not more, effect on working the dog as laxity in the joint. 

For breeding dogs (and probably non-breeding dogs too), I'd spend just a few extra bucks and go to someone who is either a board certified radiologist or who knows damn well what they're doing. Because otherwise, you may be spending $50-100 less, but the positioning may not be perfect and you may end up with an inaccurate rating or maybe looking at it and scratching your head wishing you would have spent just a little more for good digital x-rays and all that. And a good radiologist can talk to you about what it will mean for the dog, especially if they have an interest in sports medicine. That's why if you're an athlete and you hurt yourself, you go to work mostly with an orthopod and a radiologist, not just the general practitioner. Not that the GP doesn't know anything, it's just not their specialty. I guess it comes down to good radiology isn't about being penny wise and pound foolish. Sure, if your dog breaks their leg, by all means, take them to the local general practitioner to have it looked at. But if the rating matters, go see the folks who really specialize in it. Fawkes will be 24 in 6 months, so I'll be asking the teaching hospital who is best to do it with for OFA, as OFA's headquarters are here in town.


----------



## Konnie Hein (Jun 14, 2006)

Now the dog in Mary's film looks perfectly straight. Were these hips rated?


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen (Apr 7, 2006)

Here is a big problem to consider with the OFA, and that is the fact that I and I am sure many other people have re-sent x rays and gotten different scores the second time around. It is too subjective.


----------



## Mary Lehman (Oct 2, 2008)

Hi Konnie. Yes, they went through OFA (ICK) and were given a rating of Good. I had really hoped for an excellent, but..........

To clue you in. These are from my male GSD, Phoenix, who will be 7 next month. Xrays were taken approximately 4-6 mos after his 2nd birthday.


----------



## Mary Lehman (Oct 2, 2008)

Hi Jeff. I too believe that the OFA is way too subjective. Send the films to 10 different vets and get 10 different opinions.

Unfortunately, Penn Hip hasn't caught on as well as I would have liked in the breeding world. Except for some breeds and breeders. I much prefer it though since it is an actual measurement.


----------



## Maren Bell Jones (Jun 7, 2006)

Jeff, unless you send the same film under two different names, how do you get two different official scores? Are you resending different films of the same dog or one film under two dogs?

And yeah, if you sent it to 10 different vets, you'd get 10 different opinions, particularly if they aren't radiologists and not from OFA. Like I said, your own GP physician isn't a radiology expert and neither is your GP vet. They can both offer opinions, but OFA is the one that matters. I can promise that when I'm in practice, I'll try to offer an opinion, but that it's the owner's responsibilty to get the official word from OFA or PennHip. I also don't necessarily see differing opinions as a problem, particularly if we're quibbling about something like excellent versus good.


----------



## Daniel Cox (Apr 17, 2006)

Mary Lehman said:


> Hi Konnie. Yes, they went through OFA (ICK) and were given a rating of Good. I had really hoped for an excellent, but..........
> 
> To clue you in. These are from my male GSD, Phoenix, who will be 7 next month. Xrays were taken approximately 4-6 mos after his 2nd birthday.


Why would you be slightly disappointed with a Good rating? Very few dogs get an excellent and even fewer GSDs. Excellent rating in OFA is almost unheard of with GSD. I would be very happy with Good on a GSD.


----------



## susan tuck (Mar 28, 2006)

I agree with you Daniel, I wouldn't discount a superior dog just for having less than excellent hips, but that's just me.


----------



## Konnie Hein (Jun 14, 2006)

susan tuck said:


> I agree with you Daniel, I wouldn't discount a superior dog just for having less than excellent hips, but that's just me.


Just for the sake of discussion, what would you personally accept for a working prospect, Susan (or anybody else who cares to answer)?


----------



## Mary Lehman (Oct 2, 2008)

Konnie Hein said:


> Just for the sake of discussion, what would you personally accept for a working prospect, Susan (or anybody else who cares to answer)?


I wasn't aware, until sometime later, that the father of my male was rated fair by OFA. And, if you look at the Xray for Phoenix, he came out pretty darned good. Sooooooooo...... In answer to Konnie's question as to what is acceptable, it's all a crap shoot. JMPO Certainly having sound structure to pass on genetically is important.

As for getting an excellent rating - I had 'hoped' for it. I know it's very hard to get that rating. We had a set of x-rays taken and the breeder we got him from wouldn't let us send them it - positioning was horrible. There is someone local that has a male GSD that got an excellent rating - so I asked her who she had do the xrays and went to them.


----------



## susan tuck (Mar 28, 2006)

Konnie: For me, it would depend on the dog, I don't have a hard & fast rule.


----------



## Konnie Hein (Jun 14, 2006)

Susan - I feel the same way.


----------



## Lisa Preston (Aug 21, 2008)

My first guy had only a fair and a good ( and 30+ birdhsot pellets showing in the hip rads...which raised some eyebrows. Of course, he was over two by then, was already a verry solid tracker, decent OB a bit wild at bitework but about there...titled quickly when I got him to some trials. Raising the worker, one can't discount lesser hips, as by the time he's old enough to get cert, he's so much more than half-trained.

It's interesting to see the films, but Maren makes a mighty good pt. Another forum I use post stacks of rads and there are some interesting opinions from very knowledgable folks as well as chaff. I am very interested but terribly underskilled to reasonably evaluate ...ya know, I can say his pelvis ain't broke.


----------

