ArticleJournal of veterinary internal medicine2021
Factors associated with clinical interpretation of tracheal wash fluid from dogs with respiratory disease: 281 cases (2012-2017).
Article in Journal of veterinary internal medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Recognition and Diagnosis of Underlying Disease Processes in Bacterial Pneumonia.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2024Review
- Factors associated with clinical interpretation of tracheal wash fluid from dogs with respiratory disease: 281 cases (2012-2017).Journal of veterinary internal medicine · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundClinicians face several dilemmas regarding tracheal washes (TWs) for the diagnosis of respiratory disease, including method and prediction of bacterial growth from cytology results.
objectiveTo compare cytology and culture of endotracheal and transtracheal washes and identify factors associated with discordancy and bacterial growth. ANIMALS: Two hundred forty-five dogs with respiratory disease.
methodsRetrospective study. Tracheal wash submissions were included if cellularity was sufficient for cytologic interpretation and aerobic cultures were performed. Collection technique, cytology, bacterial growth, and antibiotic history were analyzed.
resultsFewer transtracheal specimens (9/144, 6.3%) were excluded for hypocellularity than endotracheal (28/174, 16.1%); otherwise, results were similar and were combined. Of 281 specimens with cellularity sufficient for interpretation, 97 (34.5%) had bacteria on cytology and 191 (68.0%) had bacterial growth. Cytology positive/culture negative discordancy was uncommon (8/97, 8%). Cytology negative/culture positive discordancy was frequent (102/184, 55.4%), but occurred less often (28/184, 14.2%) when only 1+ growth or greater was considered positive. Oropharyngeal contamination was associated with bacterial growth, but not discordancy. No association was found between antibiotic administration and bacterial growth. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPORTANCE: Endotracheal wash fluid, in particular, should be screened for gross mucus or turbidity to maximize the likelihood of an adequate specimen. Otherwise, endotracheal and transtracheal specimens were similar. Presence of bacteria on cytology was a good predictor of any growth, while their absence was a good predictor of the absence of growth of 1+ or more. Recent antibiotic usage should not discourage TW culture if there is compelling reason to avoid delay.
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.