You should seek the advice of your veterinarian if your pet is ill as only he or she can correctly advise on the diagnosis and recommend the treatment that is most appropriate for your pet.

The scientific evidence to support the administration of nutritional supplements to pets is often very weak. Best evidence are randomised controlled trials (RCTs)

Green-lipped mussel (n= 4 RCT; n= 4 non-RCT)

In an uncontrolled study (Servet 2006) 75% of owners and 85% of veterinarians thought a GLM supplemented dietc improved signs of OA based on subjective scoring, however the effects cannot be attributed to the GLM component as the dog’s (n=85) base rations were different to test food. Another study (Korthauer 1992) reported improvement in lameness and posture in dogs (n=26) given a glycosaminoglycan extract of GLM, and in a placebo controlled study (n=81) subjective improvements were also reported (Pollard 2006).

Feeding a GLM-enriched diet for 30 days to 23 dogs (Rialland 2013) resulted in improved peak vertical force, motor activity and owner assessment compared to a base diet which was, unfortunately, not the same as the test diet so this cannot be attributed to the GLM content.

In two masked RCTs involving cross-breed dogs with OA addition of GLM powder to a complete dry ratione (n=32) for a 6 week period; or feeding a treat containing GLMf (n=33) improved overall OA score, joint pain and joint swelling compared to control group (Bierer 2002; Bui 2003). A subsequent RCT (Hielm-Bjorkman 2009) (n= 15) also demonstrated a significant improvement in mobility (assessed by a veterinarian) and pain (on a visual analogue scale) compared to placebo, although alleviation of pain was not as effective as carprofen. However, in this study the GLM-containing product used (Lyproflex- ICENI) contained other possible active ingredients including the Omega-3 fatty acids eicosatetraenoic acid, eicosapentaenoic acid and docosahexaenoic acid, and so any beneficial effect cannot be attributed to the GLM alone. In another randomised, masked, placebo-controlled study (Dobenecker 2002) green-lipped mussel extract failed to lead to improvement in signs of OA (n=58) based on subjective owner and veterinarian assessments.

Evidence : WEAK – Conflicting results but 7/8 studies showed a positive effect

References

Bierer TL and Bui LM. (2002) Improvement of arthritic signs in dogs fed Green-lipped Mussel (Perna canaliculus) Journal of Nutrition 132:1634S-1636S

Bui LM, and Bierer TL. (2003) Influence of green lipped mussels (Perna canaliculus) in alleviating signs of OA in dogs. Vet Ther 4(4):397-407

Dobenecker B, Beetz Y, Kienzle E. (2002) A placebo-controlled double-blind study on the effect of nutraceuticals (Chondroitin sulfate and Mussel extract) in dogs with joint disease as perceived by their owners. J Nutr 132: 1690S-1691S.

Hielm-Bjorkman A, Tulamo R-M, Salonen H and Raekallio M. (2009a) Evaluating Complementary Therapies for Canine OA Part 1 : Green-lipped Mussel (Perna canaliculus). Evidence-based Complementary and Alternative Medicine 6(3):365-373

Korthauer W, Torre J de la. (1992) Treatment of deforming arthropathy in working dogs with “Canosan”, a new glycosaminoglycan preparation (German). Kleintierpraxis 37(7): 467-8

Pollard B, Guilford WG, Ankenbauer-Perkins KL, Hedderley D (2006) Clinical efficacy and tolerance of an extract of green-lipped mussel (Perna canaliculus) in dogs presumptively diagnosed with degenerative joint disease. New Zealand Veterinary Journal 54(3): 114-8

Rialland P, Bichot S, Lussier B et al (2013) Effect of a diet enriched with green-lipped mussel on pain behaviour and functioning in dogs with clinical osteoarthritis. Canadian Journal of Veterinary Research 2012. 77(1):66-74

Servet E, Marniquet P (2006) Dietary intervention can improve clinical signs in osteoarthritic dogs. The Journal of Nutrition, 136(7) Suppl: 1995S-1997S

Updated September 2015