4.4 Article

Evaluation of prognostic factors, survival rates, and treatment protocols for immune-mediated hemolytic anemia in dogs: 151 cases (1993-2002)

出版社

AMER VETERINARY MEDICAL ASSOC
DOI: 10.2460/javma.2005.226.1869

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective-To evaluate prognostic factors, survival, and treatment protocols for immune-mediated hemolytic anemia (IMHA) in dogs. Design-Retrospective study. Animals-151 dogs with IMHA not associated with underlying infectious or neoplastic disease. Procedure-information recorded from review of medical records included signalment at the time of initial evaluation; vaccination history; 30-, 60-, and 365-day follow-up outcomes; laboratory data; results of imaging studies; and necropsy findings. Dogs were grouped according to the presence of spherocytes, autoagglutination, a regenerative erythrocyte response, and treatments received (azathioprine, azathioprine plus ultralow-dose aspirin, azathioprine plus mixed-molecular-weight heparin [mHEP], or azathioprine plus ultralow-dose aspirin plus mHEP) for comparisons. All dogs received glucocorticoids. Results-Cocker Spaniels, Miniature Schnauzers, neutered dogs, and female dogs were overrepresented. Alterations in certain clinicopathologic variables were associated with increased mortality rate. Rates of survival following treatment with azathioprine, azathioprine plus ultralow-dose aspirin, azathioprine plus mHEP and azathioprine plus ultralow-dose aspirin plus mHEP were 74%, 88%, 23%, and 70%, respectively, at hospital discharge; 57%, 82%, 17%, and 67%, respectively, at 30 days; and 45%, 69%, 17%, and 64%, respectively, at 1 year. In comparison, mean survival rates at discharge and at 30 days and 1 year after evaluation collated from 7 published reviews of canine IMHA were 57%, 58%, and 34%, respectively. Conclusions and Clinical Relevance-Treatment with a combination of glucocorticoids, azathioprine, and ultralow-dose aspirin significantly improved short- and long-term survival in dogs with IMHA.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据