4.4 Article

Surgery in a veterinary outpatient community medicine setting has a good outcome for dogs with pyometra

Journal

Publisher

AMER VETERINARY MEDICAL ASSOC
DOI: 10.2460/javma.21.06.0320

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (ASPCA)

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study compared the outcome of canine pyometra surgeries performed at different treatment facilities and found no difference in surgical survival rate. Dogs treated at referral hospitals had significantly shorter diagnosis and surgery duration, but the delay time was not related to the survival rate.
OBJECTIVE To compare the outcome of canine pyometra surgeries performed at referral hospitals with those performed at community clinics (outpatient settings), and to evaluate factors that impact outcome. ANIMALS 133 client-owned dogs with pyometra treated with ovariohysterectomy (OHE) at 2 community clinics or 2 referral hospitals between July 1, 2017, and June 30, 2019. PROCEDURES A retrospective electronic medical record search was used to identify eligible cases. Data about patient demographics and clinical characteristics were collected and analyzed for factors that could have impacted outcome. RESULTS Eighty-three dogs were treated at referral hospitals; 50 dogs were treated at community clinics. Survival to hospital discharge for all dogs was 97% (129/133) and did not differ between treatment facility type. Dogs treated at both types of facilities were similar in age, body weight, and clinical signs. Median duration between diagnosis and OHE was significantly shorter for dogs treated at referral hospitals (0 day; range, 0 to 0.7 days) versus community clinics (1.0 day; range, 0 to 14.0 days); however, delay was not related to survival to hospital discharge. Duration of hospitalization did not impact survival to hospital discharge nor survival for at least 1 week after surgery.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available