# Prelim hip/elbow x-rays



## VomBlack (May 23, 2009)

I'm having Odin's prelim x-rays done tomorrow at work, he just turned 4 months which is the minimum age for the OFA. It's more or less to make me feel better as i've been kinda paranoid about his hips for absolutely no reason.

Are any of you considering preliminary OFAs? Why or why not?

If you are (or if you have) what age do you prefer?

I'm planning on getting his OFA when he's old enough but i'd like the piece of mind before then.


----------



## suden (Jun 5, 2001)

Why so young? We do prelims on every one at a year. Have done at 6 months but not in a long time. Also we have been doing x-rays for over 25 years and at a year you get a much better PIC of what the hips/elbows really are. Would never do elbows any younger unless there was a problem.

Vikki


----------



## Doc (Jan 13, 2009)

I have lost all confidence in OFA. There archaic approach hasn't changed in 50 years and they determine the fate of all dogs based on observation of an x-ray that may or may not be accurate. With the modern miracle of science, I can not believe that they are not utilizing better technology. And besides, any dog that "passes" OFA can still produce a litter that has within it both good and bad hips and vice versa. So you "can't/shouldn't" breed the bad hip pups from that litter but his sibling can be bred until the cows come home and contains the same genes as his "bad" litter mate. Doesn't make much sense to me. So I really don't understand all the value that is placed on their subjective readings. Unfortunately, the OFA rating has been hammered into everyone's mind as the cure-all of bad hips and it isn't.

Politics aside, at least the PennHipp is a more objective and accurate reading/predictor of CHD but it is not accepted by the AKC lords and followers.


----------



## Barb E (Jun 6, 2004)

I had Dante's hips prelim'd when he was neutered at 14 months, I wish I had had the elbows done too.

If I had known that he would be so good on the x-ray table and not need to be "out" I probably would have had them done at 6-8 months (He didn't come to me until he was 4 1/2 months old)


----------



## Castlemaid (Jun 29, 2006)

> Originally Posted By: Doc And besides, any dog that "passes" OFA can still produce a litter that has within it both good and bad hips and vice versa. So you "can't/shouldn't" breed the bad hip pups from that litter but his sibling can be bred until the cows come home and contains the same genes as his "bad" litter mate. Doesn't make much sense to me. So I really don't understand all the value that is placed on their subjective readings. Unfortunately, the OFA rating has been hammered into everyone's mind as the cure-all of bad hips and it isn't.










Anyone can breed a dog with or without OFA. That is all it is, a subjective reading. It is up to the breeders to RESEARCH their breeding stock, and the siblings and relatives of their breedinb stock, to determine the probablitlity of throwing bad hips.

OFA does not tell anyone which dogs can be bred, and which ones cannot. If a breeder chooses to breed a dog based on a passing OFA grade, even though the family line is rife with bad hips, that has nothing to do with the OFA process, but rather with the lack of personal responsibility and ethics of a breeder.


----------



## VomBlack (May 23, 2009)

> Originally Posted By: sudenWhy so young? We do prelims on every one at a year. Have done at 6 months but not in a long time. Also we have been doing x-rays for over 25 years and at a year you get a much better PIC of what the hips/elbows really are. Would never do elbows any younger unless there was a problem.
> 
> Vikki


Well one advantage to doing it at a young age is if there happens to be an issue that needed surgery it would be beneficial to do it while the dog is still fairly young, so i'd like to be sure that if there is a problem that I caught it early enough. Just my personal opinion.


----------



## kleinenHain (Sep 20, 2007)

I like to do all my prelims at a year old.


----------



## Chris Wild (Dec 14, 2001)

> Originally Posted By: DocWith the modern miracle of science, I can not believe that they are not utilizing better technology.


Well, until modern science can locate the genetic markers for HD and ED, trying to get a best guesstimate of genotype based on phenotype is all we have.



> Originally Posted By: Doc And besides, any dog that "passes" OFA can still produce a litter that has within it both good and bad hips and vice versa. So you "can't/shouldn't" breed the bad hip pups from that litter but his sibling can be bred until the cows come home and contains the same genes as his "bad" litter mate. Doesn't make much sense to me.


Such is the nature of polygenic disorders. Though obviously the clear littermate doesn't have the same genes as the dysplastic one, or else he'd have HD too. Does he carry some of those bad genes? Possibly. This is why looking at the HD rate within the litter as a whole, and doing the same for the parents, grandparents, and other close relatives is every bit as important as any one individual dog's hip rating. 

An OFA Fair from a litter of Fairs is most likely going to produce a lower incidence of HD than an OFA Excellent with a bunch of dysplastic littermates





> Originally Posted By: DocPolitics aside, at least the PennHipp is a more objective and accurate reading/predictor of CHD but it is not accepted by the AKC lords and followers.


When it comes to judging an individual dog, perhaps PennHip is better. But the biggest strike against them is the lack of a searchable database. Considering how important it is to look at the overall trends within a bloodline not having a database that breeders, fanciers and buyers can use to do that is a major problem.


----------



## Liesje (Mar 4, 2007)

I did Nikon at 7 months. I wasn't itching to do it, but a friend was doing it and the breeder arranged to have it done so I figured why not? I did not submit them to OFA. The breeder's husband is a world known expert in veterinary radiology, has his own machines and clinic at their home. He was (or maybe still is?) on the OFA panel and I think was involved with starting PennHIP. So, as far as I'm concerned no one is more qualified to read films, paying the OFA was not necessary especially since they were only prelims. When Nikon is two he will do them again and then they will be submitted to the WDA/SV for a rating (I don't know if the WDA/SV is accepting OFAs anymore?).


----------



## Chris Wild (Dec 14, 2001)

We do prelims around 6 months on pups we keep back. Mainly because we want to know if the pup is worth continuing to develop as a potential competition and breeding prospect.

On pups we sell, we ask people to do prelims before a year old. This is partly for the welfare of the pup, because if there is a problem the sooner it is detected the more options for treatment, and since most go into sport/working homes we want to make sure the dogs are physically capable of doing the work without it causing irreversible damage to the joints. From a breeding standpoint it's also important to have the info on how a dam's litter turned out before we decide if we'll breed her again or pick a stud for her.


----------



## VomBlack (May 23, 2009)

Thanks for the info. I probably should have mentioned that part of why i'm checking so early is I bought him with the intention of working him, and we're already doing rag/tugwork with the trainer. I don't want to push a dog to do something they're not physically capable of doing.


----------



## Doc (Jan 13, 2009)

I would say that PennHip's data is much more accurate than OFA because all dogs that are PennHipp'd are recorded. There is no "I'm not sending in these hips because I know they will not pass" as there is in OFA. 

It would seem to me that perhaps this polygentic disorder isn't the root cause of HD - did you ever consider that. That idea has been around 60+ years and we are no closer to working that out than we were back then. Did it ever cross your mind that perhaps, just maybe, the guy who made that suggestion was wrong? NO, everyone at the time jumped on board and preached it as the gospel. No one ever questioned how it can occure in one hip and not another; why it can skip generations; how one pup in a litter is rated "excellent" and one is HD level 4; or if environmental issues come into play; or is nutrition absorption lacking in HD dogs. HD being polygenic is only the tip of the iceberg. And OFA x-rays are full of faults and could not pass a validity test if subjected to one. If this is going to be used to grade something, it should at least be valid. And where is the proof that it is polygenic?


----------



## girlll_face (Jun 9, 2009)

I worry about Bella also. I carry her up and down our steps sometimes! It's completely unfounded. I think it's better to hold off until her bones are more mature so you can get a better idea of how they'll be as an adult.


----------



## suden (Jun 5, 2001)

If you are x-raying a pup that young-PennHip is better(JMO) than OFA. We do a lot of x-rays-PennHip/OFA at a year. OFA again at 2 to certify. The only time we have redone PennHip at 2 is the 1st is below the breed median. PennHip has stayed the same-OFA has changed-from Fair to Good. We do OFA because everyone knows OFA-but we breed by PennHip. 
On our Mali's-we are working on 3rd Gen. 
The GSD are a work in progress-need a few more years to see if we are working in the right direction. But since my health is an issue-hopefully my friend will carry on with the GSD and I hope that maybe I'll be around to see the results)

Vikki


----------



## Doc (Jan 13, 2009)

I think you have figured out the path to take. i couldn't agree more.


----------



## VomBlack (May 23, 2009)

I haven't looked much into PennHip, OFA is such a common one I just kinda researched that instead. Luckily one of the vets I work with has 3 GSDs of her own, 2 of which are working so I can get her opinions on the x-rays and where to send them, if anywhere.


----------



## Liesje (Mar 4, 2007)

Before PennHIP or OFA, I think it's important to have someone who knows what they are doing taking the films. 

While I don't agree with Doc's assessment of the organizations or those that use them, I think this is an important statement, "they determine the fate of [dogs] based on observation of an x-ray that may or may not be accurate."

So if you have a vet that really doesn't know what they are doing, that will effect the prelim (in the general sense, not necessarily an official prelim rating given by PennHIP or OFA). It's like me submitting mediocre or bad photos for a stock photography application.


----------



## VomBlack (May 23, 2009)

Very good point, fortunately our practice routinely does rads to be sent out for certification, so I don't doubt the capabilities of the staff.









I'm not _too_ worried about these x-rays, I just want to make sure there are no obvious problems. So far on physical exams the docs aren't seeing anything and his gait seems normal enough, I just worry.


----------



## Doc (Jan 13, 2009)

Lies, I wouldn't expect you to ever agree with me on most anything - and that's fine. 
To me it is more important to get a more accurate reading - which in this case is done by PennHip, along with years of breeding and observations of pups with similar bloodlines, than to be blessed by the OFA and AKC. And to think that you can send the same x-rays into the OFA at different times and have them come back with completely different ratings is a very serious flaw - if you are using that measurment to judge a dog.

And the OFA, with their great wisdom, subjectively reads the x-rays and base their readings on one hip instead of both; and rates a dog on the lowest reading out of the 3 observations. Someone needs to explain to me how that is accurate. Then you add in the fact that a large percent of the x-rays are poor quality then you really have a mess.

As far as the organizations are concerned, do you not find it interesting that membership in these organizations are steadily declining? I assume dog owners do not see much value in their services anymore. The same with attendance at dog shows. The numbers keep going down and there are very few "young" people around.


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

I don't want to put them under unless I have to, so I wait until they are two, unless there is a problem like someone limping, etc. 

Rushie started limping on a front leg for no reason, so we x-rayed from the paw to the shoulder and found no problem. The vet thought it was probably just a strained tendon or something. It went away and did not recur. 

I don't send x-rays in until they are two. I let them be dogs but do not do serious agility or jumping with them until they are two. 

They do jump like crazy on concrete at home though. I am starting to think there is not a baby gate high enough that Ninja cannot clear.


----------



## Liesje (Mar 4, 2007)

Doc, I am not affiliated nor have I ever submitted films to either organization, and I no longer compete in AKC events, so I cannot comment on membership or who is blessing who. If I want an accurate reading on my dog's hips, then I have films done by the most qualified person I can find. Luckily in my case we have Mr. Veterinary Radiology less than 2 hours away. I would trust his films and readings over both PennHIP and the OFA any day (whose research was used to start PennHIP).

If I want to do a breed survey with my dog I will submit films for a a-stamp rating through the WDA/SV since that's what's required for a breed survey but if I had a reason to be concerned about the hips then I'd talk to a radiologist.

Anyway, I don't see anything wrong with doing prelims on a puppy and I don't think they even need to be submitted since the main motivation is just to make sure nothing is obviously wrong. To me it seems pointless to spend money on it when it won't carry any weight for breeding or breed survey.


----------



## Doc (Jan 13, 2009)

Lies, I agree with you.









I wish I had a qualified expert living close to me. Would your friend consider reading x-rays for a fee?


----------



## Liesje (Mar 4, 2007)

Doc, yes, as far as I know people from all over the world send him films. I don't know his fee, but the prelims for hips and elbows (with the sedation) was very reasonable compared to what I've seen posted here. He is retired from MSU but still running his radiology clinic and doing some research I think.


----------



## Doc (Jan 13, 2009)

Excellent and thank-you.


----------



## Chris Wild (Dec 14, 2001)

Yup, he'll do consults if you mail or email the x-ray. We use him for our x-rays, and have consulted him on occasion when there's been a question regarding x-rays taken by other vets.


----------



## Liesje (Mar 4, 2007)

No prob if you need the name I can PM you.


----------



## Chris Wild (Dec 14, 2001)

> Originally Posted By: DocI would say that PennHip's data is much more accurate than OFA because all dogs that are PennHipp'd are recorded. There is no "I'm not sending in these hips because I know they will not pass" as there is in OFA.


I agree PennHip can provide important information. But since bloodline research is paramount to making good breeding decisions about hips and everything else, the inability to research the status of dogs and their relatives tested via PennHip is a HUGE disadvantage to the system.

As far as the whole thing with not sending x-rays in if they won't pass with OFA, I really don't see that much as an issue. Most folks seriously using the system to research bloodlines are smart enough to know to be suspicious if a dog isn't OFAed. Sure, just might never have been done, but from a research for breeding standpoint it's the safer bet to assume that if a dog isn't listed it's because it didn't pass.

PennHip requiring all x-rays to be submitted is integral to their rating system since they do things on a sliding scale of where an individual dog falls in comparision to other representatives of their breed. The aren't requiring x-rays to be submitted to keep people from "cheating" they're doing it because they're whole system is based upon it and the more representatives of a breed they have the better. Now, if they instituted a searchable database where people could go and look these things up, then the all x-rays must be submitted thing would be very valuable and give them a leg up over OFA. As it is, without a database, while PennHip can be valuable regarding an individual dog, it is useless from a bloodline research standpoint.

And I'm certainly no lover of OFA and the inconsistencies in their ratings. I long ago gave up putting much stock in if they say Excellent, Good or Fair, because the rating could have been completely different on another day of the week. I look at it more from a pass/fail standpoint and that's about it.



> Originally Posted By: DocIt would seem to me that perhaps this polygentic disorder isn't the root cause of HD - did you ever consider that.


Well, it's obviously genetic and there has yet to be any sort of legitimate research to the contrary. Though of course many breeders do love to latch onto the few obscure studies that point to environmental causes, so they can get out of being responsible for it. Yes environmental and nutrition factors can play a role in onset and severity, but the malformation of the joint is genetic. And since it's quite obviously NOT a matter of simple recessive or dominant genes, that sort of leaves polygenic.


----------



## Doc (Jan 13, 2009)

How can you content that "it is obviously genetic" when different pups within a litter, and different litters from the same sire and dam, produce various hip grades? Where is the obvious genetics in that?

Let's just hypothesize that HD is not genetic. Now where do look to uncover what could be causing/contributing to the problem? HD has be labeled as genetic and no one has been able to identify the genes and markers for over 60 years? Perhaps those genes and genetic markers don't exist? Makes more since to me than saying "oh we know they are there but we just can't find them". What kind of science is that?

And I think to down play environmental causes is a narrow minded approach - especially in light of so many x-rays that show one "excellent" hip and one "very poor". I would think in the case of a one hip "bad", one "good" something other than genetics is the main causal factor. Perhaps mom laying on them after birth? Perhaps the lack of collagen production due to poor vitamin/mineral transport and assimulation is a factor. Perhaps the stress of the pups constantly struggling and pushing to get to the dam for nursing is contributing. 

And you may want to read some research by Belfield and others before you state that "no legitimate research to the contrary" has been conducted. It has and it is published.

I do not believe that "malformation of the joint is genetic." I think it is caused by the lack of collagen production on the part of the pup and/or a lack of proper nutrients absorption from mom to pup during gestation. I think if look at research concerning malformed joints, there is a high correlation between improper nutrient levels and malformed joints. Is genetics causing that? Perhaps. Can it be manipulated? - Indeed.

If you really want to uncover/discover the causes of HD, assume it is not genetic/poly genetic, and only then will an answer be found. The fundamentals of scientific research.


----------



## Chris Wild (Dec 14, 2001)

Throwing out differences in grades, which for the most part are subjective, and looking at x-rays from a pass/fail standpoint, there are obvious trends that run in families. These trends are even more obvious if you look not only at the pass/fail or rating but at the actual x-rays to see the shape of the bones and formation of the joints. 

Sometimes it is not obvious which parent or side of the family tree to point to, but other times it is. And when that happens to point to the sire, not the dam, that quite clearly rules out any sort of environmental or nutritional factors in utero or after as the only contribution the sire has is genetic.


----------



## Doc (Jan 13, 2009)

So one step to counter HD is to use a stud with "passable hips" based on historical x-rays of lineage. I would agree with that.

So we strive to cross a dam and sire that have "genetically passable" hips. (Both the dam and sire linage has been reviewed and both have a long line of great hips) And we still end up with variation in the litter. If both parents have good "hip genetics" what happened to the pups that end up with "failing" hip(s)? 

Basing HD solely on genetics is a crap shoot.


----------



## Chris Wild (Dec 14, 2001)

Well, that would be the nature of polygenic disorders. The "bad" genes remaining hidden, or with minimal expression within a family, then on occasion a pup looses the genetic lottery and inherits a big dose of them.

I don't see how the nutritional/environmental thing, particularly as it relates to in utero and very early post whelp development, would explain the variation within litters any better than genetic causes would? You use variation amongst litters as a sign it's not genetic. I could just as effectively use it as a sign it's not environmental. Seems like it more comes down to how the end user chooses to interpret the information.

What I have found interesting in my own experience is that I can take 2 x-rays from littermates, one passing and one failing, look at them side by side and there are very distinct similarities in overall formation of the bones and joint. It will be just minor variations (usually sublaxation) that made one pass and one fail. Expand that out across a whole litter, and you can tell the dogs are all related just by looking at the x-rays. The formation of their joints is that similar. 

This is why in addition to having customers do certifications on their dogs, we always ask for digital photos of the x-rays for our own research. The similarities that are seen amongst x-rays from closely related dogs, especially between littermates, are uncanny and those similarities do not exist with dogs in the general population. An OFA Good and Mild HD from the same litter will have x-rays that look more alike than two OFA Goods from different litters.

Those similarities between closely related dogs could only be explained in a NON genetic way if all those dogs experienced the exact same nutrition, pre and post natal care, environment, etc... That obviously isn't the case, especially amongst dogs related by sire, not dam. Yet those similarities are undeniably there if you look at the actual x-rays and the only clear cut commonality between those dogs is genetics.


----------



## Doc (Jan 13, 2009)

A very clear explanation, Chris. And informative and one that I agree with. Thanks.

My only question - which is probably more rhetorical is - if it is that clear, why hasn't the gene(s) and markers been identified?

I still have to believe that both nutrition and environmental conditions contribute more than most are willing to admit and addressing all three will go a long way in the elimination of HD.


----------



## Chris Wild (Dec 14, 2001)

> Originally Posted By: Doc
> My only question - which is probably more rhetorical is - if it is that clear, why hasn't the gene(s) and markers been identified?



I can only assume lack of funding for research. While important to us GSD people, I doubt it's very important to the world at large.

Also, if we look at the genetic health testing that is currently available for GSDs, like vWD and DM, these things are quite different from HD. First, they tend to be much more life threatening and have a much more significant impact on quality of life compared to HD, so if one has to prioritize with research they would be higher on the priority list. Second, they are all very simple patterns of inheritence. DM, the most recent in terms of genetic marker identification, is a simple autosomal recessive. So much easier to research, identify and find a test for than something with a more complicated pattern of inheritance that is not only considered polygenic, but also multifactorial and quite likely also involve other complications such as incomplete penetrance, gene coupling and inheritability thresholds.



> Originally Posted By: Doc
> I still have to believe that both nutrition and environmental conditions contribute more than most are willing to admit and addressing all three will go a long way in the elimination of HD.


I don't doubt these affect the expression of HD in terms of severity, age of onset and development of symptoms. But only if a genetic predisposition already exists.


----------



## Doc (Jan 13, 2009)

So it makes me question why so much emphasis is placed on HD? As you pointed out, there are more severe detrimental issues associated with the German shepherd but you don't hear of them being a factor when breeding. Interesting isn't it?


----------



## Liesje (Mar 4, 2007)

> Originally Posted By: DocSo it makes me question why so much emphasis is placed on HD? As you pointed out, there are more severe detrimental issues associated with the German shepherd but you don't hear of them being a factor when breeding. Interesting isn't it?


Depends on who you're talking to. I don't think people post about every health problem all over the 'net or if that would even be appropriate but good breeders look at a LOT more than HD. I know of one insanely popular stud dog that coincidentally or not continues to throw a certain heath problem often much worse than HD. With this knowledge I would never breed to this dog (not that I plan to breed dogs, but if I did....), purchase progeny, or even get any dog from this kennel.

There are breeders that care and breeders that look the other way.


----------



## Chris Wild (Dec 14, 2001)

> Originally Posted By: DocSo it makes me question why so much emphasis is placed on HD? As you pointed out, there are more severe detrimental issues associated with the German shepherd but you don't hear of them being a factor when breeding. Interesting isn't it?


While certainly not the most life threatening or life altering genetic health condition in this breed, it certainly is one of, if not the, most prevalent. And because of that, it is also one of the most widely known.

If a disproportionate amount of attention is paid to HD over other health issues, I don't see that as a case of too much emphasis being placed on HD, but rather too little on others. But again, considering it's prevalence, it's natural to pay more attention to something that affects roughly 25-30% of the population over something that affects 2%, even if the latter is a more serious situation in those very few dogs who get it.

And while the methods available to try to reduce incidence of HD have proven insufficient at eliminating it, they do have a positive impact on reducing it. So there is no excuse to ignore what can be done to try to cut down on HD... namely certifying breeding stock and doing a lot of research into the hip status of the bloodlines in general (that being where, again, a searchable database is important).


----------



## Barb E (Jun 6, 2004)

When I told people I was getting a GSD so many said something about HD. NO one said anything abut DM, ED, Bloat, etc.

Of course none of them were GSD people









I once bumped into a couple at a park that had a 10 year old GSD in fabulous shape and a 2 year old Golden that had already had both hips replaced.

What's out there is out there - I think as lovers of this breed part of what falls on us is to educate others on the issues not so well known...


----------



## Chris Wild (Dec 14, 2001)

The education is a good point, Barb.

It's an uphill battle to educate the general public about what to look for, and what to avoid, when it comes to buying a puppy. HD gets a lot of focus because if the person we're trying to educate has any awareness of health issues whatsoever, they probably have heard of HD. If they only know of ONE genetic health problem in GSDs, 99 times out of 100 it's HD. So when educting them on the importance of health testing, starting with something they're already at least somewhat familiar with is a logical place to start. They've heard of it, and are probably paranoid about it, so it strikes a cord and thus they may listen. And it's easier to catch their attention and get them to listen than if someone starts talking about disorders they've never heard of and can't even pronounce.

Plus, it provides an easily verifiable dipstick when it comes to shopping for a breeder. Because while the presence of hip/elbow certifications doesn't necessarily mean the breeder really cares about health or pays attention to things other than dysplasia, you can bet that a breeder who doesn't even do hip certifications on their dogs sure doesn't give a hoot about health. 

So telling people to look for OFA certs and such isn't done necessarily because it's the most important aspect to look at, but because it's something the general population will easily understand as important once it's explained to them, and once they're listening they can be further educated. It's also a good way for them to quickly weed out at least the worst breeders.


----------



## VomBlack (May 23, 2009)

So far so good for Odin, we did his hip x-rays this afternoon and everything looks great. I can stop worrying for now.


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

If hip dysplasia is totally genetic and not environmental, a dysplastic bitch might have several pups tested, none of which are dysplastic. 

Is it likely for a sire and dam to both be dyspastic and have every pup tested and all to be clear of the problem?


----------



## Doc (Jan 13, 2009)

IMO - which is usually not the same as others in here - I'm not sure it is likely, but I think it would be possible.


----------



## dOg (Jan 23, 2006)

We could xray and see hips long before the genome was mapped, 
maybe someday soon DNA testing will mean more than being able to proove Who's your Daddy, and a checklist of things may be accurately screened for...in the meantime, xrays and the OFA board are how it is done.


----------

