Penn Hip method

GalomyOak · 20-05-2011, 15:08

PennHip makes the recommendation that breeders use animals that are within the tightest half of their breed population (lowest distraction/laxity number); this is more reliable obviously, if there is a large population tested for the breed. PennHip begins providing numbers against a control group for the breed, once 20 dogs have been tested within a breed.

PennHip research has shown that dogs who test at .30 or below have virtually no chance of developing HD (only one dog of thousands ever has). Conversely, dogs close to or over .70 are almost guaranteed to develop HD. Between .30 and .70, there is an increasing chance to develop HD. GSDs tend to develop HD at lower numbers than other breeds. Pennhip hypothesizes this is because of the "tucked under" structure of a GSDs rear legs...but maybe not? Maybe it's in genetics.

PennHip makes 3 xrays. One is the same as that used for OFA in the US, or standard testing in Europe. PennHip evaluates this film for signs of HD - if it is normal, they tell you, or if there is disease, they tell you, but they don't give it a "grade" of having a little HD or a lot of HD - only yes or no to presence of the disease. At this point, I don’t think PennHip is totally reliable for our breed; but since the film is made that is the same for OFA, it costs only an extra $30 to send a second copy to OFA. Two tasks and types of research (one for now, for owners who wish to breed soon, and one for the future, that can be used with the PennHip method) can be done with the same xrays.

Once a large enough population is established, PennHip has been shown to be quite effective in decreasing (and even eliminating) HD within closed populations, if high pressure on selection for hips is used. One example is the Seeing Eye Labradors. It’s more effective because a quantitative result is used – a measurement of the laxity (elasticity, or “stretchiness”) of the ligament that makes hips tight/fit correctly, or loose/not fit correctly (HD) - rather than qualitative. It is probably not as effective to use qualitative results, since some dogs with genetics prone to developing HD never get the disease…but still pass the gene to their puppies. It could be hypothesized that these dogs have a higher laxity of the ligament – if bred to another dog with a recessive gene prone to high laxity, they could produce puppies with HD.

All of the 9 CSVs tested so far (including one in Holland, mentioned above, who has the healthiest results) have come from a variety of genetic backgrounds. So far as I know, our highest numbers have been in the high .40s, but I think it’s possible we might have a higher number now - one who shows a lot of evidence of disease. Not all of the tested dogs were selected from parents with good selection for hips…so we do have a variety at this point. Its PennHip’s goal to have an open database of tested dogs (voluntary for the owner), and they are currently working on this.

saschia · 20-05-2011, 15:30

Thanks elf for the papers, it is interesting read.

OK, so I understand now that there is an absolute number, which I find reassuring. I agree that for the selection it is preferable to use animals from the better group.

But if there was theoretical situation, that all animals in the group would have the DI higher than 0.3, then I think the solution would not be to breed with the animals from the better half, but to selectively import animals with low DI for the improvement. So if there was no absolute number that had some clinical significance, then using only the comparative method would be insufficient in my opinion.

yukidomari · 20-05-2011, 18:36

"The reliability of the PennHIP method slightly improves with age, with one year 1 year being marginally superior to 6 months, which in turn is marginally better than 4 months. For all dogs, we recommend when possible, to use the mean (average) of repeated evaluations to get a more reliable estimate of a dog's hip laxity status (phenotype)."

That is from PennHIP's site.

All the people I know who have done it with their dogs, have only had it done once. I'm curious as to anyone who has done it repeatedly as PennHIP suggests that under optimal conditions it would be so, and what the results were.

Perhaps we'll do it twice or so just to see?

Also, Marcy, you said, "That said, Roni came up with C/mild HD hips when tested about 10 months later, on a .39 hip." So does that mean it's probably not reliable to do either OFA or PennHIP by itself?

GalomyOak · 30-06-2011, 17:17

Our first set of PennHip results/comparisons. There are a few more, but I am waiting for results/permission from owners.

Anthea od Vlci Skaly
OFA: Excellent A1 (25 mos)
FCI: *
PENN: .23/.37, No DJD (15 mos)

Taabernakkelin Hronsek
OFA: Mild C (27 mos) Unilateral Left
FCI:*
PENN: 38/.39, No DJD (17 mos)

Wasabogoa Arimminum
OFA: Good A2
FCI:*
PENN: .21/.30 No DJD

Delan van Heimrod
OFA: *
FCI: *
PENN: .25/.19 No DJD

Piter (Panicucci)
OFA: Fair (B)
FCI: B
PENN: .26/.26 No DJD

Elsa Non Solo Lupo
OFA: Good A2
FCI: *
PENN: .20/.20 No DJD

Laika Non Solo Lupo
OFA: Good A2
FCI: *
PENN:; .28/.26 No DJD

Estia D'ell Olim Palus
OFA: Moderate D Unilateral Left
FCI:*
PENN: .41/.47 Moderate DJD Unilateral Left

GalomyOak · 25-01-2012, 01:46

With this year (and the testing of my A litter, as well as a few other dogs) we should reach the necessary 20 dogs to have comparative statistics for Penn Hip with our breed.

Here is an article comparing the PennHip method with the UK scheme - and of course I have already talked about a comparison to the OFFA scheme: http://research.vet.upenn.edu/Portal...Feb%202010.pdf

PennHip will be holding training sessions for veterinarians in Berlin and Frankfurt, DE (28.04.12 and 29.04.12) this year so vets can become certified - a really great thing to encourage your vets to attend if they aren't too far (only, I don't know if the training will be in German or English) - to make PennHip available more in Europe.

Here is more info to pass along to your vet (in German): http://www.pennhip.info/

yukidomari · 25-01-2012, 02:11

now, if the PennHIP database were open à la OFFA......................

AMERICANI · 08-02-2012, 01:22

Marcy, I was curious when you received notification of 9 in their system.. When I sent all of my adults info, they told me there were 13...

5 of which are mine lol...

20-05-2011, 15:08	#1
GalomyOak Howling Member Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Colorado Posts: 436	PennHip makes the recommendation that breeders use animals that are within the tightest half of their breed population (lowest distraction/laxity number); this is more reliable obviously, if there is a large population tested for the breed. PennHip begins providing numbers against a control group for the breed, once 20 dogs have been tested within a breed. PennHip research has shown that dogs who test at .30 or below have virtually no chance of developing HD (only one dog of thousands ever has). Conversely, dogs close to or over .70 are almost guaranteed to develop HD. Between .30 and .70, there is an increasing chance to develop HD. GSDs tend to develop HD at lower numbers than other breeds. Pennhip hypothesizes this is because of the "tucked under" structure of a GSDs rear legs...but maybe not? Maybe it's in genetics. PennHip makes 3 xrays. One is the same as that used for OFA in the US, or standard testing in Europe. PennHip evaluates this film for signs of HD - if it is normal, they tell you, or if there is disease, they tell you, but they don't give it a "grade" of having a little HD or a lot of HD - only yes or no to presence of the disease. At this point, I don’t think PennHip is totally reliable for our breed; but since the film is made that is the same for OFA, it costs only an extra $30 to send a second copy to OFA. Two tasks and types of research (one for now, for owners who wish to breed soon, and one for the future, that can be used with the PennHip method) can be done with the same xrays. Once a large enough population is established, PennHip has been shown to be quite effective in decreasing (and even eliminating) HD within closed populations, if high pressure on selection for hips is used. One example is the Seeing Eye Labradors. It’s more effective because a quantitative result is used – a measurement of the laxity (elasticity, or “stretchiness”) of the ligament that makes hips tight/fit correctly, or loose/not fit correctly (HD) - rather than qualitative. It is probably not as effective to use qualitative results, since some dogs with genetics prone to developing HD never get the disease…but still pass the gene to their puppies. It could be hypothesized that these dogs have a higher laxity of the ligament – if bred to another dog with a recessive gene prone to high laxity, they could produce puppies with HD. All of the 9 CSVs tested so far (including one in Holland, mentioned above, who has the healthiest results) have come from a variety of genetic backgrounds. So far as I know, our highest numbers have been in the high .40s, but I think it’s possible we might have a higher number now - one who shows a lot of evidence of disease. Not all of the tested dogs were selected from parents with good selection for hips…so we do have a variety at this point. Its PennHip’s goal to have an open database of tested dogs (voluntary for the owner), and they are currently working on this. __________________ "What lies behind us and what lies ahead of us are tiny matters compared to what lies within us."~Henry David Thoreau http://www.galomyoak.com Last edited by GalomyOak; 20-05-2011 at 15:18.

20-05-2011, 15:30	#2
saschia Member Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: Bratislava Posts: 936	Thanks elf for the papers, it is interesting read. OK, so I understand now that there is an absolute number, which I find reassuring. I agree that for the selection it is preferable to use animals from the better group. But if there was theoretical situation, that all animals in the group would have the DI higher than 0.3, then I think the solution would not be to breed with the animals from the better half, but to selectively import animals with low DI for the improvement. So if there was no absolute number that had some clinical significance, then using only the comparative method would be insufficient in my opinion. __________________ Saschia (Sasa Zahradnikova) http://www.chiens-loup-tchecoslovaqu...ei-et-damon.ws

20-05-2011, 18:36	#3
yukidomari Moderator Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: Los Angeles CA Posts: 847	"The reliability of the PennHIP method slightly improves with age, with one year 1 year being marginally superior to 6 months, which in turn is marginally better than 4 months. For all dogs, we recommend when possible, to use the mean (average) of repeated evaluations to get a more reliable estimate of a dog's hip laxity status (phenotype)." That is from PennHIP's site. All the people I know who have done it with their dogs, have only had it done once. I'm curious as to anyone who has done it repeatedly as PennHIP suggests that under optimal conditions it would be so, and what the results were. Perhaps we'll do it twice or so just to see? Also, Marcy, you said, "That said, Roni came up with C/mild HD hips when tested about 10 months later, on a .39 hip." So does that mean it's probably not reliable to do either OFA or PennHIP by itself? Last edited by yukidomari; 20-05-2011 at 18:46.

30-06-2011, 17:17	#4
GalomyOak Howling Member Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Colorado Posts: 436	Our first set of PennHip results/comparisons. There are a few more, but I am waiting for results/permission from owners. Anthea od Vlci Skaly OFA: Excellent A1 (25 mos) FCI: * PENN: .23/.37, No DJD (15 mos) Taabernakkelin Hronsek OFA: Mild C (27 mos) Unilateral Left FCI:* PENN: 38/.39, No DJD (17 mos) Wasabogoa Arimminum OFA: Good A2 FCI:* PENN: .21/.30 No DJD Delan van Heimrod OFA: * FCI: * PENN: .25/.19 No DJD Piter (Panicucci) OFA: Fair (B) FCI: B PENN: .26/.26 No DJD Elsa Non Solo Lupo OFA: Good A2 FCI: * PENN: .20/.20 No DJD Laika Non Solo Lupo OFA: Good A2 FCI: * PENN:; .28/.26 No DJD Estia D'ell Olim Palus OFA: Moderate D Unilateral Left FCI:* PENN: .41/.47 Moderate DJD Unilateral Left __________________ "What lies behind us and what lies ahead of us are tiny matters compared to what lies within us."~Henry David Thoreau http://www.galomyoak.com Last edited by GalomyOak; 30-06-2011 at 17:28.

25-01-2012, 01:46	#5
GalomyOak Howling Member Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Colorado Posts: 436	With this year (and the testing of my A litter, as well as a few other dogs) we should reach the necessary 20 dogs to have comparative statistics for Penn Hip with our breed. Here is an article comparing the PennHip method with the UK scheme - and of course I have already talked about a comparison to the OFFA scheme: http://research.vet.upenn.edu/Portal...Feb%202010.pdf PennHip will be holding training sessions for veterinarians in Berlin and Frankfurt, DE (28.04.12 and 29.04.12) this year so vets can become certified - a really great thing to encourage your vets to attend if they aren't too far (only, I don't know if the training will be in German or English) - to make PennHip available more in Europe. Here is more info to pass along to your vet (in German): http://www.pennhip.info/ __________________ "What lies behind us and what lies ahead of us are tiny matters compared to what lies within us."~Henry David Thoreau http://www.galomyoak.com

25-01-2012, 02:11	#6
yukidomari Moderator Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: Los Angeles CA Posts: 847	now, if the PennHIP database were open à la OFFA......................

08-02-2012, 01:22	#7
AMERICANI Member Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: Planet Earth Posts: 111	PennHIP Results Marcy, I was curious when you received notification of 9 in their system.. When I sent all of my adults info, they told me there were 13... 5 of which are mine lol...