Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27938359›Full record

ArticleBMC veterinary research2016

Comparison of contrast-enhanced multidetector computed tomography angiography and splenoportography for the evaluation of portosystemic-shunt occlusion after cellophane banding in dogs.

Sebastian Schaub, Antje Hartmann, Tobias Schwarz, Karsten Kemper, Kerstin H Pueckler, Matthias A Schneider

Open access · goldAbstract readComparative StudyEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

Article in BMC veterinary research, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 19% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 14 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.

Sebastian SchaubDepartment of Veterinary Clinical Sciences, Small Animal Clinic, Justus-Liebig-University Giessen, 35392, Giessen, Germany. Sebast.schaub@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4527-2953
Antje HartmannDepartment of Clinical Veterinary Medicine, Vetsuisse Faculty, University of Bern, 3012, Bern, Switzerland.
Tobias SchwarzRoyal (Dick) School of Veterinary Studies, The University of Edinburgh, Roslin, Midlothian, EH25 9RG, UK.
Karsten KemperDepartment of Veterinary Clinical Sciences, Small Animal Clinic, Justus-Liebig-University Giessen, 35392, Giessen, Germany.
Kerstin H PuecklerDepartment of Veterinary Clinical Sciences, Small Animal Clinic, Justus-Liebig-University Giessen, 35392, Giessen, Germany.
Matthias A SchneiderDepartment of Veterinary Clinical Sciences, Small Animal Clinic, Justus-Liebig-University Giessen, 35392, Giessen, Germany.
Justus-Liebig-Universität Gießen · DERoslin Institute · GBUniversity of Bern · CH

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMany patients with a congenital extrahepatic portosystemic shunt (PSS) do not tolerate an immediate shunt closure. Therefore, slow progressive techniques were developed. To evaluate the success of shunt closure diagnostic imaging is essential to identify possible residual blood flow through the shunt vessel. There is a lack of information about the reliability of computed tomography angiography (CTA) for evaluating residual flow through a PSS after treatment. The purpose of this prospective study was to compare the results of CTA with splenoportography. Three months after cellophane banding CTA and splenoportography were performed in 20 dogs and reviewed by three independent examiners, respectively. In both imaging modalities the presences of a residual shunt was judged as present or absent and the extent of visibility of portal vasculature was recorded.

resultsBased on the evaluation of the splenoportography residual flow through shunt was present in 6 dogs. The classification of residual shunt present or absent showed a substantial to perfect agreement (κ = 0.65-1.00) between the observers in splenoportography and a slight to moderate agreement (κ = 0.11-0.51) for CTA. Sensitivity and specificity varied between 0.50 and 1.00 and 0.57-0.85, respectively. Significant correlation between CTA and splenoportography for the classification of residual shunt was present only in one observer but not in the other two.

conclusionMore studies were classified as residual shunt positive with CTA compared to splenoportography. It remains unclear which methods do reflect reality better and thus which method is superior. The greater inter-rater agreement for splenoportography suggests a greater reliability of this technique.

Indexed as

AnimalsCellophaneComputed Tomography AngiographyDog DiseasesDogsFemaleMalePortal VeinPortographyProspective StudiesVascular MalformationsCellophaneAngiographyComputed tomographyExtrahepatic portosystemic shuntSplenoportography

Identifiers

PMID27938359
PMCPMC5148836
OpenAlexW2560752890

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.