← Articles

Yu et al: Systematic review of surgical treatment for severe elbow osteoarthritis in dogs
Veterinary Surgery 1, 2026

Systematic review of surgical treatment for severe elbow osteoarthritis in dogs

🔍 Key Findings

  • Canine unicompartmental elbow (CUE) had the highest reported success (91–98%) and the second-best safety profile (NNH = 7.6).
  • Sliding humeral osteotomy (SHO) showed moderate success (43–82%) but had the best safety profile (NNH = 9.5).
  • Overall evidence quality was low, with no Level I studies and only five Level II (prospective) studies.
  • Success measures were inconsistent, often based on subjective outcomes (e.g., owner satisfaction), limiting comparability.
  • Adverse events were common, with high complication rates in arthrodesis and total elbow arthroplasty (TEA).
  • One study using objective outcome (PVF) showed only 43% long-term success for SHO, suggesting possible overestimation of success in subjective studies.
  • The review highlights the need for validated, standardized outcome tools in elbow OA surgery trials.
  • Number needed to harm (NNH) emerged as a more consistent and informative safety metric than success percentages.

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?
Flag for reviewSuggest findings
← Articles

Yu et al: Systematic review of surgical treatment for severe elbow osteoarthritis in dogs
Veterinary Surgery 1, 2026

🔍 Key Findings

  • Canine unicompartmental elbow (CUE) had the highest reported success (91–98%) and the second-best safety profile (NNH = 7.6).
  • Sliding humeral osteotomy (SHO) showed moderate success (43–82%) but had the best safety profile (NNH = 9.5).
  • Overall evidence quality was low, with no Level I studies and only five Level II (prospective) studies.
  • Success measures were inconsistent, often based on subjective outcomes (e.g., owner satisfaction), limiting comparability.
  • Adverse events were common, with high complication rates in arthrodesis and total elbow arthroplasty (TEA).
  • One study using objective outcome (PVF) showed only 43% long-term success for SHO, suggesting possible overestimation of success in subjective studies.
  • The review highlights the need for validated, standardized outcome tools in elbow OA surgery trials.
  • Number needed to harm (NNH) emerged as a more consistent and informative safety metric than success percentages.

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 Yu 2026 et al., on elbow OA surgery outcomes, what percentage of dogs treated with sliding humeral osteotomy had major complications in one prospective long-term study?

A. 10%
B. 25%
C. 43%
D. 60%
E. 0%

Answer: 43%

Explanation: In a long-term prospective study, 43% of dogs undergoing SHO had major complications.
In Yu 2026 et al., on elbow OA surgery outcomes, which procedure had the highest reported clinical success rate in dogs?

A. Total elbow arthroplasty
B. Canine unicompartmental elbow (CUE)
C. Sliding humeral osteotomy (SHO)
D. Proximal abducting ulnar osteotomy (PAUL)
E. Elbow arthrodesis

Answer: Canine unicompartmental elbow (CUE)

Explanation: CUE had a reported success rate of 91–98%, the highest among the procedures reviewed.
In Yu 2026 et al., on elbow OA surgery outcomes, what was emphasized as a priority for improving future surgical OA studies in dogs?

A. Use of non-surgical control groups
B. Inclusion of only objective gait analysis
C. Standardized outcome measures with blinded evaluators
D. Focus on new surgical technologies
E. Limiting review to Level I trials

Answer: Standardized outcome measures with blinded evaluators

Explanation: The authors advocate for validated outcome tools and blinded evaluators to improve comparability and reduce bias.
In Yu 2026 et al., on elbow OA surgery outcomes, what was a key limitation affecting the interpretation of success rates in surgical treatments for elbow OA?

A. Low statistical power due to small sample sizes
B. Use of outdated surgical techniques
C. Lack of surgical standardization across centers
D. Inconsistent and subjective outcome measures
E. Short duration of follow-up

Answer: Inconsistent and subjective outcome measures

Explanation: Most studies relied on subjective measures like owner satisfaction, making comparison difficult.
In Yu 2026 et al., on elbow OA surgery outcomes, evaluating harm via number needed to harm (NNH), which procedure had the best safety profile?

A. Proximal abducting ulnar osteotomy (PAUL)
B. Elbow arthrodesis
C. Canine unicompartmental elbow (CUE)
D. Sliding humeral osteotomy (SHO)
E. Total elbow arthroplasty

Answer: Sliding humeral osteotomy (SHO)

Explanation: SHO had the highest NNH of 9.5, indicating fewer dogs harmed per procedures performed.

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

Get Instant Access

Educational content developed independently and supported by Simini.

The maker of Simini Protect Lavage.

Review More Key Summaries from this Veterinary Surgery Journal Issue

Schroeder

 et al: 

Fascial plane mapping for superficial tumor resection in dogs. Part I: Neck and trunk

Healy

 et al: 

Significance of incidentally identified bullae and blebs on thoracic computed tomography and prevalence of subsequent pneumothorax in dogs

Williams

 et al: 

Evaluation of the addition of adrenaline in a bilateral maxillary nerve block to reduce hemorrhage in dogs undergoing sharp staphylectomy for brachycephalic obstructive airway syndrome. A prospective, randomized study

O'Marra

 et al: 

Perioperative management of septic peritonitis in small animals: A review

Lopez Barroso

 et al: 

Accuracy of a table‐bound reduction and drill guide system for minimally invasive sacroiliac screw placement in cats

Something off with this article?
Tell us what needs fixing—drop your note below.
Cancel
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.
Cancel
Thanks for the suggestion!
We’ll review it as soon as possible.
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.