Frapwell et al: Analysis of humeral condylar morphology in dogs with and without humeral intracondylar fissure
Veterinary Surgery 1, 2026

Analysis of humeral condylar morphology in dogs with and without humeral intracondylar fissure

🔍 Key Findings

  • HIF-affected dogs had significantly greater angle A and B, indicating increased axial articular angulation of the medial and lateral humeral condyle (p < .001).
  • Vertical condylar height (lengths a and b) was significantly greater in HIF-affected dogs compared to controls (p = .007 and p < .001 respectively).
  • Angle G (dorsal plane medial condyle angle) was also significantly greater in HIF-affected dogs, suggesting altered medial humeral morphology (p < .001).
  • The angle between axial surfaces (A–B angle) was significantly more acute in HIF dogs (107.4° vs. 114.2°, p < .001), suggesting potential for increased shear force.
  • Springer Spaniels with HIF showed significantly greater angulation and vertical height than unaffected Springer controls (p < .001 to .007 across variables).
  • Morphological differences persisted across non-spaniel breeds, reinforcing that altered condylar geometry is not breed-restricted.
  • Authors propose that greater condylar angulation contributes to shear stress, orthogonal to the fissure, possibly contributing to HIF pathogenesis.
  • These morphologic alterations could inform future screening or preventive strategies, and may explain variable surgical outcomes and implant failure.

Simini Surgery Review Podcast

How critical is this paper for crushing the Boards?

🚨 Must-know. I’d bet on seeing this.

📚 Useful background, not must-know.

💤 Skip it. Doubt it’ll ever show up.

Thanks for the feedback!
‍
We'll keep fine-tuning the articles vault.
Oops — didn’t go through.
‍
Mind trying that again?

Frapwell et al: Analysis of humeral condylar morphology in dogs with and without humeral intracondylar fissure
Veterinary Surgery 1, 2026

🔍 Key Findings

  • HIF-affected dogs had significantly greater angle A and B, indicating increased axial articular angulation of the medial and lateral humeral condyle (p < .001).
  • Vertical condylar height (lengths a and b) was significantly greater in HIF-affected dogs compared to controls (p = .007 and p < .001 respectively).
  • Angle G (dorsal plane medial condyle angle) was also significantly greater in HIF-affected dogs, suggesting altered medial humeral morphology (p < .001).
  • The angle between axial surfaces (A–B angle) was significantly more acute in HIF dogs (107.4° vs. 114.2°, p < .001), suggesting potential for increased shear force.
  • Springer Spaniels with HIF showed significantly greater angulation and vertical height than unaffected Springer controls (p < .001 to .007 across variables).
  • Morphological differences persisted across non-spaniel breeds, reinforcing that altered condylar geometry is not breed-restricted.
  • Authors propose that greater condylar angulation contributes to shear stress, orthogonal to the fissure, possibly contributing to HIF pathogenesis.
  • These morphologic alterations could inform future screening or preventive strategies, and may explain variable surgical outcomes and implant failure.

Simini Surgery Review Podcast

Know What Matters in the Literature - and Why

We distill peer-reviewed surgical studies into clinically relevant summaries and
exam-style questions, so you can make informed decisions with confidence.

Free Access. No Spam. Just Smarter Surgical Learning

Multiple Choice Questions on this study

In Frapwell 2026 et al., on humeral condyle morphology, what morphometric change was most significantly associated with HIF in affected dogs?

A. Increased joint incongruity
B. Increased condylar rotation
C. Decreased condylar height
D. Increased axial articular surface angulation
E. Decreased lateral epicondylar width

Answer: Increased axial articular surface angulation

Explanation: Increased medial and lateral axial condylar angles (angles A and B) were significantly higher in dogs with HIF, suggesting steeper joint surfaces.
In Frapwell 2026 et al., on humeral condyle morphology, what hypothesis was proposed to explain HIF formation related to condylar shape?

A. Failure of ossification centers
B. Cartilage degeneration in the MCP
C. Shear force orthogonal to the fissure
D. Trauma-induced osteoarthritis
E. Congenital absence of subchondral bone

Answer: Shear force orthogonal to the fissure

Explanation: Authors propose that abnormal condylar angles may generate shear forces orthogonal to the fissure, contributing to HIF pathogenesis.
In Frapwell 2026 et al., on humeral condyle morphology, what was the observed effect of HIF on the A–B angle between axial surfaces?

A. It increased by >10°
B. It remained unchanged
C. It was significantly more acute
D. It was significantly more obtuse
E. It reversed angulation

Answer: It was significantly more acute

Explanation: HIF-affected elbows had a more acute A–B angle (107.4° vs 114.2°), suggesting altered load distribution across the condyle.
In Frapwell 2026 et al., on humeral condyle morphology, how did vertical condylar height differ in HIF-affected dogs compared to controls?

A. Shorter medial condyle only
B. Shorter lateral condyle only
C. Increased medial and lateral heights
D. No difference in height
E. Variable depending on breed

Answer: Increased medial and lateral heights

Explanation: Lengths a and b (vertical height) were significantly greater in HIF-affected elbows, indicating elongation of the condyle.
In Frapwell 2026 et al., on humeral condyle morphology, how did HIF-associated morphology differ in non-spaniels versus controls?

A. Only lateral angle increased
B. Both axial angles and height increased
C. No significant morphologic differences
D. Only dorsal plane angles changed
E. HIF occurred only in small breeds

Answer: Both axial angles and height increased

Explanation: Non-spaniel breeds with HIF had similar changes as spaniels—greater axial angles and increased vertical condylar height.

Access the full library of surgical summaries and exam-style questions.

Educational content developed independently and supported by Simini.

The maker of Simini Protect Lavage.

Something off with this article?
Tell us what needs fixing—drop your note below.
Thanks for flagging this!
We’ll review your note as soon as possible.
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
Anything to add to this article?
Know a finding or detail we missed? Share it below.
Thanks for the suggestion!
We’ll review it as soon as possible.
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.