ArticleEquine veterinary journal2017
The role of Leptospira spp. in horses affected with recurrent uveitis in the UK.
Article in Equine veterinary journal, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed, 41 citations in OpenAlex.
- Evaluation of Laboratory Techniques for the Diagnosis of Leptospira-Associated Equine Recurrent Uveitis (ERU) With Focus on the Goldmann-Witmer Coefficient.Veterinary ophthalmology · 2026Article
- Seropositivity for PathogenicTropical medicine and infectious disease · 2025Article
- Preliminary evaluation of safety and migration of immune activated mesenchymal stromal cells administered by subconjunctival injection for equine recurrent uveitis.Frontiers in veterinary science · 2023Article
- Comparison of TwoVeterinary sciences · 2022Article
- Analysis of 1840 Equine Intraocular Fluid Samples for the Presence of Anti-Veterinary sciences · 2022Article
- Infectious Uveitis in Horses and New Insights in Its Leptospiral Biofilm-Related Pathogenesis.Microorganisms · 2022Review
- Detection of Anti-LipL32 Antibodies in Serum Samples from Horses with Chronic Intraocular Infection withPathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- Serological Survey ofPathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- Seroprevalence ofPathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundEquine recurrent uveitis (ERU) is a common cause of ocular pain and blindness in horses. Leptospira spp. have been commonly implicated in the pathophysiology of ERU in mainland Europe and the USA. No recent studies have been carried out in the UK, but Leptospira is reported not to be a major factor in the aetiology of ERU in the UK.
objectivesTo establish the prevalence of Leptospira-associated ERU in the UK and to identify the serovars involved in these cases; to compare serum vs. aqueous humour antibody levels in cases and controls in order to confirm the diagnosis of Leptospira-associated ERU, and to assess the usefulness of serology alone as a confirmatory test for Leptospira-associated ERU in the UK. STUDY
designCase-control study.
methodsEyes enucleated for clinical reasons in ERU-affected horses were collected. Blood and aqueous humour were obtained to determine antibody levels against a variety of Leptospira serovars and C-values (aqueous humour value/serum value) were calculated. In addition, eyes, blood and aqueous humour were obtained from control cases for comparison. Histopathology was performed in all eyes to confirm uveitis in each case. Differences in seroprevalences between ERU and control cases and between Leptospira- and non-Leptospira-associated ERU cases were calculated.
resultsA total of 30 ERU and 43 control eyes were analysed. Of the ERU eyes, only two had a C-value of >4 (prevalence of Leptospira-associated uveitis: 6.7%). Serovars hardjo and javanica were detected. There was no difference in seroprevalence between horses with uveitis and control cases (65.5% and 41.9%, respectively; P = 0.11) or between Leptospira- and non-Leptospira-associated uveitis cases (100% and 63.0%, respectively; P = 0.52). MAIN LIMITATIONS: The study was limited by low case numbers. Eyes were presented at different stages of disease. The only test used to detect Leptospira was the microscopic agglutination test.
conclusionsLeptospira-associated ERU is uncommon in the UK. Serology alone may not help to definitively diagnose Leptospira-associated uveitis in this country.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.