OBJECTIVE To estimate reliability of interpretation of neurologic examination findings for localization of vestibular dysfunction in dogs. DESIGN Cross-sectional study. ANIMALS 496 dogs that underwent MRI of the head for diagnosis of a neurologic problem between September 2011 and September 2015. PROCEDURES Medical records were reviewed and data collected regarding signalment and neurologic examination, MRI, and CSF findings. Independent observers interpreted the findings, and agreement was assessed for a subset of dogs. Distributions of variables were compared between dogs with and without a neurologic findings-based interpretation of vestibular disease. RESULTS 37% (185/496) of dogs had signs of vestibular dysfunction, of which 82% (151/185) had MRI abnormalities. In 73% (110/151) of dogs with MRI abnormalities, lesions involved central vestibular structures, and in 19% (29/151), lesions involved peripheral vestibular structures. On the basis of neurologic findings interpretation, 86% (160/185) of dogs were classified as having central vestibular dysfunction, and 61% (98/160) of these had an MRI-identified central vestibular lesion. Agreement among 3 independent observers was good (κ = 0.72) regarding use of neurologic examination findings to diagnose central versus peripheral vestibular dysfunction and very good (κ = 0.85) regarding use of MRI to diagnose peripheral vestibular lesions. Despite this agreement, only 29% (7/24) of dogs with a consensus clinical interpretation of peripheral vestibular dysfunction had MRI-identified peripheral lesions. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE Although interobserver agreement was good for distinguishing central from peripheral vestibular dysfunction in dogs through interpretation of neurologic examination findings, this interpretation did not agree with the MRI-based diagnosis.
Background: Validated spinal cord injury (SCI) scores have been established for veterinary species but are not uniformly used in practice.Hypothesis/objectives: To determine the level of agreement of SCI scores at the time of admission versus those assigned from reconstructed medical records in a population of dogs with intervertebral disk herniation (IVDH).Animals: Eighty-six client-owned dogs with confirmed IVDH. Methods: Retrospective study. Medical records were reviewed for history, physical examination, neurologic examination, and recorded Modified Frankel score (MFS) and Texas spinal cord injury score (TSCIS) at the time of admission. Three raters, all board-certified neurologists, assigned MFS and TSCIS based on digitized abstracted medical records to each patient. These scores were then compared to the recorded score at the time of admission.Results: Actual agreement for MFS and TSCIS derived from medical records by the 3 raters compared to prospectively derived MFS and TSCIS was 77.9 and 51.2%, respectively. A kappa value of 0.572 (95% CI 0.450, 0.694; P < .001) and an ICC of 0.533 (95% CI 0.410, 0.646; P < .001) were calculated for MFS scores. A kappa value of 0.100 (95% CI 0.000, 0.222; P = .107), and an ICC of 0.503 (95% CI 0.377, 0.620; P < .001) were calculated for TSCIS scores.Conclusions and Clinical Importance: Results showed that SCI scores recorded at the time of admission often do not agree with those retrospectively abstracted from medical records. Agreement was less when using the more complex TSCIS scale and therefore the MFS scale might be more appropriate for use in retrospective studies.
Ventral application of screw and PMMA constructs for AA subluxation, as described here, is associated with clinical improvement in the majority of dog. Major adverse events are infrequent and the technique is considered relatively safe.
Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is a common test for dogs with suspected intradural spinal cord lesions, however studies on diagnostic performance for this test are lacking. Objectives of this multi-institutional, retrospective, case-control study were to estimate sensitivity and specificity of MRI for (1) distinguishing between histopathologically confirmed intradural spinal cord disease versus degenerative myelopathy in dogs, (2) categorizing intradural spinal cord diseases as neoplastic, inflammatory, or vascular; and (3) determining tumor type within the etiologic category of neoplasia. Additional aims were to (1) determine whether knowledge of clinical data affects sensitivity and specificity of MRI diagnoses; and (2) report interrater agreement for MRI classification of intradural spinal lesions. Cases were recruited from participating hospital databases over a 7-year period. Three reviewers independently evaluated each MRI study prior to and after provision of clinical information. A total of 87 cases were sampled (17 degenerative myelopathy, 53 neoplasia, nine inflammatory, and eight vascular). Magnetic resonance imaging had excellent (>97.6%) sensitivity for diagnosis of intradural spinal cord lesions but specificity varied before and after provision of clinical data (68.6% vs. 82.4%, P = 0.023). Magnetic resonance imaging had good sensitivity (86.8%) and moderate specificity (64.7-72.5%) for diagnosing neoplasia. Sensitivity was lower for classifying inflammatory lesions but improved with provision of clinical data (48.1% vs. 81.5%, P = 0.015). Magnetic resonance imaging was insensitive for diagnosing vascular lesions (25.0%). Interrater agreement was very good for correctly diagnosing dogs with intradural lesions (ĸ = 0.882-0.833), and good (ĸ = 0.726-0.671) for diagnosing dogs with neoplasia.
Expression of the 7b protein, as indicated by detection of antibodies against the protein, was found in most FCoV-infected cats. Seropositivity for this protein was not specific for the FCoV virulent biotype or a diagnosis of FIP.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.