Surgical Approaches to the Canine Elbow: Techniques and Nuances

By Dr. Zubair Khalid, DVM, MS, PhD · 2026-08-11

Key Takeaways

• The choice between medial and lateral surgical approaches to the canine elbow is dictated by the primary lesion's location, with medial approaches favored for fragmented coronoid process and medial compartment disease, while lateral approaches are indicated for ununited anconeal process and lateral humeral condylar fractures.
• Medial approaches involve dissection between the pronator teres and flexor carpi radialis, risking the median nerve and brachial artery, whereas lateral approaches utilize the interval between the extensor carpi radialis and common digital extensor, with the radial nerve at risk.
• The medial epicondylar osteotomy offers the most extensive humeral articular cartilage exposure among medial techniques but necessitates secure fixation to restore collateral ligament function and prevent valgus instability, unlike the flexor carpi radialis myotomy which preserves collateral integrity but provides less exposure.
• Lateral approaches generally preserve the lateral collateral ligament, maintaining joint stability, and are advantageous for visualizing the anconeal process and lateral humeral condyle, with a CT-defined safe corridor supporting lateral entry for transcondylar screw placement.
• Combined medial and lateral approaches are reserved for complex comminuted fractures, such as Y-T fractures of the humeral condyle, to facilitate accurate reduction and stable fixation of both epicondylar ridges and the intracondylar component, despite increased operative time and soft tissue trauma.
• Intraoperative monitoring for neurovascular integrity, including direct nerve visualization and distal limb assessment (color, pulse, capillary refill), is critical to prevent iatrogenic injury, with documentation of findings and postoperative neurologic examination being essential.

The canine elbow is a complex hinge joint that demands precise surgical exposure for the treatment of fragmented coronoid process, osteochondritis dissecans, ununited anconeal process, and articular fractures. This article compares the medial and lateral approaches to the elbow, detailing the dissection planes, structures at risk, and the exposure each approach provides. It serves the practicing veterinarian who performs or assists in elbow surgery and needs a working reference for selecting an approach based on the pathology and the planned procedure.

The choice between a medial and lateral approach is governed by the location of the primary lesion and the need to preserve collateral ligament function. Medial compartment disease dominates canine elbow dysplasia, while lateral approaches serve conditions such as ununited anconeal process and lateral humeral condylar fractures. The surgeon must also consider whether the approach can be extended, whether it permits concurrent arthrotomy and luxation, and how it affects postoperative stability. These decisions are informed by comparative anatomic studies and by the biomechanical consequences of each exposure.

At a Glance

Anatomic Basis of Elbow Exposure

The elbow is a stable hinge joint reinforced by medial and lateral collateral ligaments, the joint capsule, and the surrounding musculature. The medial collateral ligament originates on the medial epicondyle and inserts on the proximal ulna and radius. The lateral collateral ligament originates on the lateral epicondyle and inserts on the proximal radius and the annular ligament. Both ligaments resist varus and valgus stress and contribute to rotational stability.

The muscles that cross the joint form natural dissection planes. On the medial side, the pronator teres and flexor carpi radialis originate from the medial epicondyle and cover the joint capsule. The median nerve and brachial artery pass through the cubital fossa and must be identified and retracted. On the lateral side, the extensor carpi radialis and common digital extensor cover the lateral joint capsule, and the radial nerve runs deep to the brachialis muscle before dividing into superficial and deep branches.

A comparative study of three medial approaches in cadaver elbows quantified the articular cartilage exposure and the immediate postoperative stability provided by each technique. The approaches evaluated were desmotomy of the medial collateral ligament with tenotomy of the pronator teres, longitudinal myotomy of the flexor carpi radialis, and osteotomy of the medial epicondyle. The osteotomy provided significantly greater humeral cartilage exposure than either of the other two approaches, and the desmotomy approach provided greater exposure than the myotomy. All three approaches provided similar ulnar cartilage exposure. Biomechanical testing showed that the osteotomy and myotomy approaches preserved stiffness and energy absorption at 13 degrees of valgus deviation, while the desmotomy approach reduced these parameters. These findings indicate that the medial epicondylar osteotomy offers the widest view of the humeral articular surface but requires secure reattachment to maintain stability. The study's results are reported in the comparative analysis of three medial surgical approaches to the canine elbow.

Principles of Approach Selection

The surgeon selects an approach based on the location of the lesion, the need for concurrent procedures, and the tolerance of the patient for postoperative instability. Medial approaches are indicated for fragmented medial coronoid process, medial compartment osteoarthritis, and osteochondritis dissecans of the medial humeral condyle. Lateral approaches are indicated for ununited anconeal process, lateral humeral condylar fractures, and lesions of the lateral coronoid process.

The extent of exposure required varies with the procedure. Arthrotomy alone may suffice for inspection and biopsy, while fragment removal or fracture fixation demands wider exposure. The surgeon must also anticipate the need for luxation of the joint. Full luxation requires division or osteotomy of a collateral ligament or epicondyle, and the method of repair influences the postoperative plan. The medial epicondylar osteotomy provides the widest exposure but commits the surgeon to internal fixation of the osteotomized fragment. The desmotomy approach provides less exposure but can be repaired primarily, accepting some loss of valgus stability.

The biomechanical consequences of each approach have been quantified in cadaveric models. The medial epicondylar osteotomy and the flexor carpi radialis myotomy preserve the stiffness and energy absorption of the elbow under valgus loading, whereas the desmotomy of the medial collateral ligament reduces these measures. These data support the preferential use of osteotomy or myotomy when wide medial exposure is required and the collateral ligament can be preserved. The same study reported that the osteotomy approach exposed significantly more humeral cartilage than the myotomy or desmotomy approaches, making it the preferred technique for procedures on the medial humeral condyle. These findings are detailed in the study of exposure and postoperative stability of three medial surgical approaches.

Medial Approaches

Approach Through the Flexor Carpi Radialis

The patient is positioned in dorsal recumbency with the affected limb abducted and externally rotated, or in lateral recumbency with the affected limb down. The incision begins over the distal third of the humerus, medial to the biceps tendon, and extends distally to the proximal third of the radius. The subcutaneous tissue is divided, and the deep fascia is incised along the cranial border of the flexor carpi radialis.

The interval between the pronator teres cranially and the flexor carpi radialis caudally is developed. The median nerve and brachial artery lie deep to the pronator teres and must be identified and protected. The joint capsule is exposed and incised parallel to the humeral condyle. Retraction of the capsule reveals the medial coronoid process and the medial aspect of the humeral condyle.

For wider exposure, a longitudinal myotomy of the flexor carpi radialis can be performed. This approach preserves the medial collateral ligament and provides access to the medial coronoid process and the medial humeral condyle. The myotomy is repaired with simple interrupted sutures at closure.

Medial Epicondylar Osteotomy

The approach begins as described above, but the dissection is carried to the medial epicondyle. The origins of the flexor muscles and the medial collateral ligament are elevated as a single osteotomized fragment. The osteotomy is performed with an oscillating saw or osteotome, taking care to protect the median nerve and brachial artery. The fragment is reflected distally, exposing the entire medial joint compartment.

This approach provides the greatest humeral cartilage exposure of the three medial techniques studied. The osteotomized epicondyle is reattached with a lag screw or tension band wire at closure. The repair must be secure enough to allow early weight bearing, as the flexor muscles and the medial collateral ligament both originate from the fragment.

Lateral Approaches

The lateral approach is performed with the patient in lateral recumbency and the affected limb uppermost. The incision begins over the lateral humeral epicondyle and extends distally along the cranial border of the lateral collateral ligament. The deep fascia is incised between the extensor carpi radialis and the common digital extensor. The radial nerve is identified deep to the brachialis muscle and protected throughout the dissection.

The joint capsule is incised parallel to the lateral collateral ligament, which is preserved and retracted caudally. This approach exposes the lateral coronoid process, the anconeal process, and the lateral aspect of the humeral condyle. For fractures of the lateral humeral condyle, the approach can be extended proximally along the humeral shaft to allow plate application. The lateral approach preserves the lateral collateral ligament and therefore maintains valgus stability of the joint.

Combined Approaches

Some conditions require simultaneous medial and lateral exposure. Comminuted Y-T fractures of the humeral condyle, for example, are repaired through combined medial and lateral approaches to allow accurate reduction of the intracondylar fracture and stable fixation of the epicondylar ridges. This combined strategy was used successfully in a series of five cats with severely comminuted supracondylar fractures, where accurate intracondylar reduction was achieved in all cases and three cats returned to normal function. The report of Y-T humeral fractures with supracondylar comminution in five cats illustrates the value of dual exposure for complex articular fractures, although the small case series limits generalization to the broader canine population.

Combined approaches increase operative time and soft tissue trauma but may be unavoidable for complex fractures or for procedures that require visualization of both joint compartments. The surgeon should plan the skin incision to allow both approaches through a single wound when possible, and should close each layer separately to restore the normal anatomic relationships.

Decision Framework for Approach Selection

The choice between medial, lateral, and combined approaches rests on the location of the primary pathology, the need for concurrent procedures, and the surgeon's familiarity with each exposure. Preoperative CT or high-detail radiography should identify the specific compartment involved, the presence of fragmented coronoid process, osteochondritis dissecans of the humeral condyle, ununited anconeal process, or articular fractures.

The medial epicondylar osteotomy provides the greatest humeral articular cartilage exposure of the three medial approaches evaluated in cadaveric comparison, significantly exceeding both the flexor carpi radialis myotomy and medial collateral ligament desmotomy with pronator teres tenotomy. All three medial approaches delivered statistically similar ulnar cartilage exposure. The osteotomy also preserved immediate postoperative valgus stiffness and energy absorption better than the desmotomy approach in the same biomechanical testing. When the pathology is confined to the medial coronoid or the medial humeral condyle, the flexor carpi radialis myotomy remains the workhorse because it avoids the need for osteotomy fixation and its attendant healing period. Choose the epicondylar osteotomy when the medial compartment requires wide exposure, such as for complex coronoid fragmentation, medial compartment disease with concurrent flexor tendinopathy, or revision arthrotomy after failed prior exploration.

Lateral approaches are preferred for pathology of the lateral humeral condyle, the anconeal process, and the caudal joint compartment. The lateral exposure also provides a safer corridor for transcondylar screw placement in humeral condylar fractures. CT-based anatomic study of 84 elbows demonstrated that drilling lateral-to-medial offers a larger safe corridor than medial-to-lateral drilling, with the lateral entry point located 0.3 times humeral condylar diameter cranial and 0.3 times distal to the lateral epicondyle. This finding supports the lateral approach as the primary exposure for intracondylar fracture repair, particularly when the fracture configuration allows the surgeon to choose the drilling direction.

Patient status changes the calculus. Obese or heavily muscled patients make the medial approach more demanding because the flexor carpi radialis lies deep within the antebrachial musculature and retraction is hindered by the intact medial collateral ligament. In these patients, the lateral approach may offer faster exposure despite the pathology being medial, accepting that the medial compartment will be visualized indirectly. Conversely, a patient with preexisting valgus instability or medial collateral ligament compromise should not undergo the desmotomy approach, as it further destabilizes the joint. The osteotomy and myotomy approaches preserve immediate stability and are therefore preferred in this setting.

Step-by-Step Medial Approach Through the Flexor Carpi Radialis

Position the patient in dorsal recumbency with the affected limb abducted and externally rotated, or in lateral recumbency with the affected limb down and the contralateral limb retracted. The medial epicondyle is the primary landmark. Palpate the medial humeral epicondyle and the olecranon. The incision begins 3 to 4 cm proximal to the medial epicondyle, courses directly over the epicondyle, and extends 4 to 6 cm distally along the craniomedial aspect of the antebrachium.

Divide the subcutaneous tissues sharply. Identify the antebrachial fascia and incise it along the same line. The pronator teres muscle lies cranially and the flexor carpi radialis lies caudally. The interval between these two muscles is developed by blunt dissection. The flexor carpi radialis is then elevated from its origin on the medial epicondyle and reflected distally, or a longitudinal myotomy is performed through its belly. The myotomy preserves the origin and allows the muscle to be split along its fiber direction, which reduces the risk of denervation compared with a transverse tenotomy.

Retract the flexor carpi radialis caudally and the pronator teres cranially. The joint capsule is now visible beneath the deep fascia. Incise the capsule parallel to the joint margin, from the medial coronoid process cranially to the medial collateral ligament caudally. Do not incise the medial collateral ligament. The medial coronoid process, the medial humeral condyle, and the trochlear notch come into view. Flexion of the elbow improves visualization of the caudal joint compartment. Varus stress applied by an assistant opens the medial joint space further.

Closure is layered. The joint capsule is closed with absorbable monofilament suture in a simple continuous pattern. The flexor carpi radialis myotomy is reapposed with interrupted sutures through the epimysium. The antebrachial fascia is closed separately. Skin closure is routine.

Step-by-Step Lateral Approach

Position the patient in lateral recumbency with the affected limb uppermost. The lateral humeral epicondyle and the olecranon are the landmarks. The incision begins 3 to 4 cm proximal to the lateral epicondyle, passes over the epicondyle, and extends 4 to 5 cm distally along the craniolateral aspect of the antebrachium.

Incise the subcutaneous tissues and identify the lateral fascia. The extensor carpi radialis muscle lies cranially and the common digital extensor lies caudally. Develop the interval between these muscles by blunt dissection. The lateral collateral ligament is identified caudally and must be preserved. The joint capsule lies deep to the extensor muscle bellies and is incised parallel to the joint margin, from the lateral coronoid process cranially to the lateral collateral ligament caudally.

The lateral humeral condyle, the radial head, and the anconeal process are visualized. Pronation and supination of the antebrachium bring different portions of the joint into view. The anconeal process is best seen with the elbow in extension and the antebrachium supinated. For transcondylar screw placement, the lateral epicondyle serves as the reference for the entry point at 0.3 times humeral condylar diameter cranial and 0.3 times distal to the epicondyle, as established in the CT-based safe corridor study.

Closure mirrors the medial approach. The joint capsule is closed, the intermuscular interval is reapposed, and the fascia and skin are closed in layers.

Intraoperative Monitoring and Documentation

The primary intraoperative risk is iatrogenic neurovascular injury. The median nerve and its accompanying vessels lie immediately caudal to the flexor carpi radialis and are vulnerable during the medial approach. The ulnar nerve courses through the cubital tunnel caudal to the medial epicondyle and is at risk during epicondylar osteotomy. The radial nerve is at risk during the lateral approach as it crosses the lateral aspect of the humerus proximal to the epicondyle.

Monitor the limb distal to the surgical field for color, pulse quality, and capillary refill time. Direct observation of the exposed nerves is the most reliable monitor, the nerves should be visualized and protected with moistened sponges throughout the procedure. If a nerve is inadvertently transected, primary repair under magnification is preferred. Postoperative neurologic examination should be documented in the record, including conscious proprioception, withdrawal reflex, and pain perception in the distal limb.

Document the following in the surgical record: the approach used, the specific pathology identified, the degree of articular cartilage damage graded by the modified Outerbridge system, the presence of loose bodies or fragmented cartilage, the method of fragment removal or fixation, and the integrity of the collateral ligaments and neurovascular structures at closure. Photographic documentation of the joint before and after intervention is valuable for client communication and for longitudinal comparison, particularly in growing dogs where osteoarthritis progression is expected and serial assessment is planned. The multimodal management framework for osteoarthritis in growing dogs emphasizes early identification of elbow pathology and structured follow-up, which begins with accurate intraoperative documentation.

Complications and Failure Modes

The most common complications after elbow arthrotomy relate to iatrogenic injury, inadequate exposure, and postoperative instability. Each approach carries a distinct risk profile.

The medial epicondylar osteotomy provides the greatest humeral articular exposure of the medial approaches, but it creates a fracture that must be repaired. Fixation failure, nonunion, or displacement of the osteotomized epicondyle results in loss of flexor muscle origin integrity and valgus instability. The desmotomy approach, which divides the medial collateral ligament, predictably reduces valgus stiffness and energy absorption in cadaveric testing, and this instability persists after closure. The flexor carpi radialis myotomy spares both the collateral ligament and the epicondyle but provides the least humeral exposure of the three medial approaches. Surgeons who choose this approach for complex intra-articular pathology may find the exposure insufficient for accurate reduction and implant placement.

Lateral approaches risk injury to the anconeal process and the lateral collateral ligament. Overzealous retraction can fracture the anconeal process, particularly in immature dogs with incomplete ossification. The radial nerve is not directly in the surgical field, but excessive caudal retraction of the triceps can place traction on the nerve as it courses distally.

Early detection of complications relies on serial postoperative assessment. Persistent lameness beyond the expected soft tissue recovery period, crepitus on manipulation, or a sudden increase in swelling should prompt radiography. Valgus stress testing under sedation can identify collateral ligament insufficiency, but comparison with the contralateral limb is essential because normal elbows have measurable physiologic laxity.

Common Errors and Corrective Actions

Less experienced surgeons make several predictable errors. The most consequential is selecting an approach before fully characterizing the pathology. A surgeon who commits to a lateral approach for a fragmented medial coronoid process will struggle to address the lesion adequately and may damage healthy lateral structures while searching for pathology that lies medially. Preoperative CT or arthroscopy, where available, should direct approach selection.

Incorrect patient positioning undermines the medial approach. The elbow must be in maximum supination with the shoulder in slight flexion to relax the medial soft tissues. Inadequate supination places tension on the flexor muscles and makes the internervous plane difficult to identify. The surgeon should verify that the medial epicondyle is facing directly upward before incising.

During the flexor carpi radialis approach, the surgeon may inadvertently enter the belly of the flexor digitorum superficialis or the pronator teres instead. The fascial plane between the flexor carpi radialis and the adjacent flexors is subtle, and the distinction becomes harder once hemorrhage stains the tissues. Identifying the tendon of the pronator teres at its insertion on the radius before deepening the dissection provides a reliable landmark.

Retraction injuries occur when assistants apply sustained, excessive force. The ulnar nerve lies caudal to the medial epicondyle and is vulnerable during medial approaches if retractors are placed too far caudally. Intermittent retraction and periodic visual checks of the nerve position reduce this risk.

Limitations of Current Evidence

The comparative evidence for medial approaches derives largely from a single cadaveric biomechanical study published in 1994. That study measured immediate postoperative stability and articular exposure but did not assess long-term clinical outcomes, healing of the osteotomy, or functional recovery in live dogs. The finding that the medial epicondylar osteotomy provides superior humeral exposure does not establish that it produces better clinical results, and many surgeons reserve osteotomy for cases where the flexor carpi radialis approach proves inadequate.

Expert opinion still differs on several points. Some surgeons routinely perform a medial epicondylar osteotomy for medial coronoid disease because of the excellent exposure, while others argue that the morbidity of the osteotomy and its fixation outweighs the benefit when the flexor carpi radialis approach can access most lesions. There is no prospective clinical trial comparing these approaches for functional outcomes.

The innervation of the elbow joint capsule is complex, and denervation procedures have been described as an alternative for pain management in osteoarthritis. A pilot study in normal dogs demonstrated that a combined medial and lateral approach could achieve denervation without measurable sensory or motor deficits, but the clinical application of this technique in arthritic dogs remains experimental. The role of denervation relative to arthrotomy, arthroscopy, or medical management is not established.

Referral and Consultation Criteria

Referral to a boarded surgeon is appropriate when the surgeon cannot achieve adequate exposure through a familiar approach, when the pathology is more extensive than preoperative imaging suggested, or when the patient has had previous elbow surgery with scar tissue that obscures normal planes. Revision arthrotomy in a previously operated elbow carries substantially higher risk of iatrogenic nerve or vascular injury, and the threshold for referral should be lower in these cases.

Specialist consultation is also warranted for comminuted intra-articular fractures, for elbows with concurrent instability, and for juvenile patients with suspected elbow dysplasia where the surgical plan may need to include multiple procedures. The American College of Veterinary Surgeons maintains resources describing the scope of surgical conditions and expected outcomes that can help practitioners counsel owners about the value of referral. Laboratory involvement is rarely needed for routine arthrotomy, but aerobic and anaerobic culture should be submitted when synovial fluid analysis or gross findings suggest septic arthritis, because the surgical plan and postoperative antimicrobial strategy will differ.

Regulatory reporting is not typically triggered by elbow arthrotomy itself. However, if a complication arises from a suspected implant failure, the surgeon should report the event to the implant manufacturer and, where applicable, to the relevant regulatory authority. Practitioners should consult their regional professional guidance, such as the resources maintained by the American Veterinary Medical Association, for current expectations regarding adverse event reporting.

Frequently Asked Questions

How do I choose between a medial and lateral approach when I have limited preoperative imaging?

Without advanced imaging, base the decision on the suspected pathology and physical examination findings. Medial compartment disease, including medial coronoid process fragmentation, is the most common elbow disorder in dogs, so a medial approach is the default for suspected elbow dysplasia. A lateral approach is preferred for humeral condylar fractures, lateral coronoid pathology, or anconeal process lesions. If the source of lameness is unclear, a medial approach through the flexor carpi radialis offers the best balance of exposure and stability for diagnostic arthrotomy. The medial epicondylar osteotomy provides the greatest humeral articular cartilage exposure but requires stable reattachment, so reserve it for cases where broader visualization is necessary.

What should I do when a medial epicondylar osteotomy fixation fails intraoperatively?

If the epicondylar fragment cannot be secured with the planned screw or pin configuration, convert to an alternative exposure instead of accepting marginal fixation. The flexor carpi radialis myotomy approach provides adequate access for most medial procedures and avoids the stability concerns of an osteotomy. Assess the fragment size and bone quality before abandoning fixation. If the fragment is large enough, reposition the implant or use a tension band construct. The biomechanical stability of the osteotomy approach depends on secure reattachment, and a failed repair risks medial collateral ligament dysfunction and valgus instability. Close the deeper layers meticulously and document the deviation from the planned approach in the surgical record.

How does the surgical approach differ in a skeletally immature dog with elbow dysplasia?

Preserve the medial humeral epiphysis and avoid aggressive periosteal stripping in growing dogs. The flexor carpi radialis approach is preferred because it does not require osteotomy or collateral ligament disruption. Osteoarthritis in growing dogs is frequently associated with elbow dysplasia, and surgical management aims to remove inciting lesions while minimizing iatrogenic growth disturbance. Multimodal management of osteoarthritis in growing dogs emphasizes early diagnosis and staged intervention. If the medial coronoid process is fragmented, remove loose fragments through the smallest arthrotomy that permits adequate visualization. Do not perform a medial epicondylar osteotomy in a juvenile patient unless absolutely necessary, as the physis may still be open and fixation becomes unpredictable.

What are the options when I cannot achieve adequate exposure through a standard lateral approach?

Extend the incision proximally along the humerus or distally along the radius to improve soft tissue mobilization. If the anconeal process or caudal humeral articular surface remains obscured, consider adding a medial approach instead of enlarging the lateral dissection. Combined medial and lateral approaches have been used successfully for complex distal humeral fractures and provide circumferential access to the joint. Alternatively, an olecranon osteotomy can be performed, though this adds morbidity and requires secure fixation. Weigh the need for exposure against the risk of iatrogenic damage from excessive retraction. If the procedure is diagnostic and no lesion is identified, close and consider advanced imaging postoperatively instead of escalating the approach.

What documentation should I include in the medical record for an elbow arthrotomy?

Record the patient positioning, the specific approach used, and any deviation from the standard technique. Note the findings at each joint compartment, including cartilage condition, the presence of fragments, and the integrity of the collateral ligaments. Document the method of closure, implant placement if applicable, and intraoperative complications. Include a diagram or photograph when possible, as written descriptions of articular lesions are often ambiguous. Professional practice resources emphasize accurate medical record keeping as a component of standard veterinary care. Postoperative instructions, including activity restriction and recheck intervals, should be documented explicitly. If a nerve or vessel was at risk during the approach, note its visual confirmation and protection.

How do I explain the need for an elbow arthrotomy to a client who is concerned about cost and recovery?

Explain that the procedure is diagnostic and therapeutic in one step, which may reduce the need for repeated anesthesia and imaging. Describe the expected recovery timeline, including the initial period of strict rest followed by gradual return to activity. Specialist resources on surgical conditions note that outcomes depend on the underlying disease and the quality of postoperative care. Be honest about the possibility that no surgical lesion is found and that medical management may still be required postoperatively. Offer a written estimate that includes the procedure, anesthesia, hospitalization, and medications. If cost is prohibitive, discuss whether a more limited approach or medical management alone is a reasonable alternative, but do not compromise the safety of the patient to reduce expense.

Related Clinical & Scientific Guides

• Perioperative Antibiotic Prophylaxis: Timing and Selection
• Surgical Approaches to the Femur and Stifle
• Fracture Healing Assessment: Radiographic and Clinical Evaluation

References and Further Reading

• Elbow denervation in dogs: development of an in vivo surgical procedure and pilot testing.. 2011.
• Exposure and postoperative stability of three medial surgical approaches to the canine elbow.. 1994.
• A proposed framework for practical multimodal management of osteoarthritis in growing dogs.. 2025.
• Surgical Approaches for Peripheral Nerve Injury Models in Yucatan Pigs.. 2026.
• Defining a safe corridor for transcondylar screw insertion across the canine humeral condyle: a comparison of medial and lateral surgical approaches.. 2014.
• Y-T humeral fractures with supracondylar comminution in five cats.. 2006.
• American College of Veterinary Surgeons Animal Health Resources. American College of Veterinary Surgeons.
• MSD Veterinary Manual, Professional Edition. MSD Veterinary Manual.
• American Veterinary Medical Association Practice Resources. American Veterinary Medical Association.

Related Articles

• Surgical Approaches to the Humerus and Elbow
• Surgical Approaches to the Canine Shoulder: Cranial and Caudal
• Surgical Approaches to the Canine Stifle: Medial and Lateral
• Surgical Approaches to the Carpus and Tarsus
• Surgical Approaches to the Femur and Stifle

This article is educational professional reference material for veterinary audiences. It is not a substitute for veterinary diagnosis, individual clinical judgment, current product labeling, or applicable regulatory requirements.