| Literature DB >> 21489295 |
Inès Barthélémy1, Eric Barrey, Pablo Aguilar, Ane Uriarte, Matthias Le Chevoir, Jean-Laurent Thibaud, Thomas Voit, Stéphane Blot, Jean-Yves Hogrel.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: This study aimed to measure the gait abnormalities in GRMD (Golden retriever muscular dystrophy) dogs during growth and disease progression using an ambulatory gait analyzer (3D-accelerometers) as a possible tool to assess the effects of a therapeutic intervention.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2011 PMID: 21489295 PMCID: PMC3103492 DOI: 10.1186/1471-2474-12-75
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Musculoskelet Disord ISSN: 1471-2474 Impact factor: 2.362
Animals included in the study.
| Age point (months) | ||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2 | 2.5 | 3 | 3.5 | 4 | 4.5 | 5 | 5.5 | 6 | 6.5 | 7 | 7.5 | 8 | 8.5 | 9 | ||
| Ckan | T | T | T | T | T | T | T | T | T | T | T | T | T | |||
| Cbof | RG | T | T | T | T | T | T | T | T | T | T | T | T | |||
| Dclick | T | T | T | T | T | T | T | T | T | T | T | T | T | T | ||
| Dclack | RG | T | T | T | T | T | T | T | T | T | T | T | T | |||
| Dzer | T | T | T | T | T | T | T | T | T | T | T | T | T | T | ||
| Dzastre | RG | RG | T | T | T | T | T | T | T | T | T | T | T | T | ||
| Dchou | T | T | W | W | ||||||||||||
| Dmo | BG | BG | BG | BG | BG | |||||||||||
| Dfois | T | T | T | T | W | W | W | |||||||||
| Dsir | T | T | T | T | W | W | ||||||||||
| Dlire | BG | BG | BG | T | T | BG | T | T | T | T | T | T | W | T | ||
| Dlice | T | BG | BG | BG | BG | T | T | T | T | T | W | T | T | W | ||
| Dluge | T | T | BG | BG | BG | BG | BG | T | BG | BG | W | T | T | T | BG | |
| Dk | BG | T | BG | W | BG | BG | BG | BG | BG | T | BG | W | W | W | W | |
| Dbrouille | T | T | T | T | T | T | T | T | T | T | T | T | T | T | T | |
| Dmon | BG | T | BG | BG | T | T | T | W | T | T | T | T | W | W | ||
| Dalton | BG | T | T | T | T | T | T | T | T | T | T | T | T | T | ||
| Didon | T | BG | BG | BG | BG | BG | BG | BG | BG | BG | BG | W | W | BG | BG | |
The six healthy and 12 GRMD dogs included in the study are summarized in this table, as well as the significant clinical events, i.e. those which have led to a premature end of the study in some GRMD dogs. The symbol of each GRMD dog, which is used in the figures, is mentioned beside his name. For each age point and each animal, if the test was successful, the most regular gait, which was selected for the analysis, is mentioned using the following letters: W (walk), T (trot), RG (rotary gallop), BG (bound gallop). The mention means that the test was not analysable.
Main results of the statistical analyses.
| Speed (m/s) | Speed/HW (/s) | SL (m) | SL/HW | SF (/s) | TP (W/kg) | Force (N/kg) | CCP/TP (%) | DVP/TP (%) | MLP/TP (%) | Regularity | Distance | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age effect | Healthy | p < 0.0001 (↗) | p = 0.0024 (↘) | p < 0.0001 (↗) | NS | p < 0.0001 (↘) | NS | NS | NS | NS | p = 0.0089 (↘) | p = 0.0145 (↗) | p = 0.0068 (↘) |
| GRMD | NS | p = 0.0067 (↘) | NS | NS | p = 0.0350 (↘) | NS | p = 0.0034 (↘) | NS | NS | NS | NS | NS | |
| Group effect | p < 0.0001 | p = 0.0003 | p = 0.0002 | p = 0.0002 | NS | p < 0.0001 | p = 0.0006 | NS | p = 0.0427 | p = 0.0162 | p = 0.0090 | p < 0.0001 | |
| 2 months | Healthy | 1.77 (0.29) | 5.68 (0.90) | 0.61 (0.07) | 1.97 (0.26) | 2.89 (0.20) | 81.5 (18.6) | 53.2 (6.3) | 44.0 (7.7) | 40.3 (7.5) | 15.8 (6.1) | 197 (49) | 1.14 (0.60) |
| GRMD | 1.02 (0.24) | 3.72 (1.04) | 0.37 (0.09) | 1.35 (0.27) | 2.70 (0.70) | 44.1 (19.2) | 43.4 (20.7) | 45.7 (9.9) | 34.7 (10.7) | 11.2 (13.1) | 209 (56) | 2.61 (0.73) | |
| p | p = 0.0010 | p = 0.0054 | p < 0.0001 | p = 0.0001 | NS | p = 0.0017 | NS | NS | NS | NS | NS | p = 0.0031 | |
| 9 months | Healthy | 2.61 (0.18) | 4.39 (0.26) | 1.18 (0.03) | 1.99 (0.06) | 2.21 (0.14) | 111.4 (16.3) | 41.7 (2.6) | 47.8 (4.8) | 43.3 (3.9) | 8.9 (3.5) | 269 (44) | 0.80 (0.24) |
| GRMD | 0.88 (0.46) | 1.66 (0.75) | 0.49 (0.22) | 0.92 (0.31) | 1.77 (0.43) | 20.8 (16.9) | 20.4 (9.3) | 44.7 (13.5) | 29.4 (6.6) | 23.8 (9.1) | 225 (31) | 3.7 (0.93) | |
| p | p < 0.0001 | p < 0.0001 | p < 0.0001 | p < 0.0001 | p = 0.0337 | p < 0.0001 | p = 0.0002 | NS | p = 0.0009 | p = 0.0033 | NS | p < 0.0001 | |
| Correlation with motor score | -0.4353 | -0.6480 | -0.6834 | -0.5082 | -0.5640 | -0.5368 | -0.3492 | 0.4454 | 0.6248 | ||||
| p | p = 0.0002 | p < 0.0001 | NS | p < 0.0001 | p < 0.0001 | p < 0.0001 | p < 0.0001 | p = 0.0030 | NS | p = 0.0001 | NS | p < 0.0001 | |
For each variable, the age effect for each group is presented in the first row, as well as the group effect. The two following rows show the mean (SD) of healthy dogs/the mean (SD) of GRMD dogs, just above the p value, for the two extreme age points (i.e. 2 and 9 months). The Pearson's coefficient of correlation with the motor score and associated p values are given in the last row. The data at each age point are given in Additional file 2 available online.
Abbreviations: HW: height at withers, SL: stride length, SF: stride frequency, TP: total power, CCP/TP: cranio-caudal part of the total power, DVP/TP; dorso-ventral part of the total power, MLP/TP: medio-lateral part of the total power, Distance (PCA): distance from the centre of gravity of the healthy group on the principal analysis component plane, NS: not significant.
Figure 1Evolution of the different gait variables with age . Each GRMD dog is represented using its own symbol (see table 1). The healthy population is represented by a grey zone, covering the mean (grey line) ± 1 SD (black lines). A: evolution of the motor score in GRMD dogs; B: evolution of the speed normalized by the height at withers (HW); C: evolution of the stride length normalized by the height at withers (HW); D: evolution of the stride frequency; E: evolution of the total power; F: evolution of the force; G: evolution of the medio-lateral part of the power; H: evolution of the regularity.
Figure 2Using principal component analysis (PCA) for the follow-up of individuals . The active individuals, used to define the plane, were eight healthy adult dogs represented by empty circles, and eleven GRMD adult dogs represented by grey points. 94.53% of the total variance is explained by the two first components, component 1 along the X axis and component 2 along the Y axis. The projection of the individuals on the PCA plane following these components are represented in panels A to D, and the projection of the variables in panel E. The healthy and GRMD dogs of the present study were used as supplementary individuals. Each GRMD dog is represented using his own symbol (see table 1). The healthy growing dogs are represented by black points. A: projection of the 2 months-old dogs on the PCA plane; B: projection of the 4 months-old dogs on the PCA plane; C: projection of the 6 months-old dogs on the PCA plane; D: projection of the 9 months-old dogs on the PCA plane. E: projection of the seven variables. The first component explains 72.61% of the total variance and is mainly explained by the stride frequency, the stride length, the total power and the medio-lateral part of the power. The second component explains 21.92% of the total variance and is mainly explained by the cranio-caudal and the dorso-ventral part of the power. F Evolution of the distance of each GRMD dog from the centre of gravity of the six age-matched healthy controls. The grey zone represents the mean (grey line) ± 1SD (black lines) of this distance in healthy dogs.