ArticleVeterinary world2022
A systematic review on urolithiasis in small ruminants according to nutrition-dependent prevalence and outcome after surgery.
Article in Veterinary world, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- A novel approach for urethral catheterization in dromedary camels: a preclinical study.BMC veterinary research · 2025Article
- Ongoing evolution of urinary tract disorders in dromedary camels (Frontiers in veterinary science · 2025Review
- Factors associated with success rate of oral force-feeding ammonium chloride administration to acidify urine in goats.Open veterinary journal · 2024Article
- Perioperative analgesic effects of an ultrasound-guided transversus abdominis plane block using bupivacaine in goats undergoing celiotomy.Frontiers in veterinary science · 2023Article
- Effects of Low Dietary Cation and Anion Difference on Blood Gas, Renal Electrolyte, and Acid Excretions in Goats in Tropical Conditions.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and Aim: Obstructive urolithiasis is a common disease in small ruminants with fatal outcomes if left untreated. Many methods have been established; however, long-term success rates remain unsatisfactory. Four bibliographic databases (PubMed, HeBis, Medline (OvidSP), and Web of Science) were searched to evaluate the prevalence of urolithiasis in small ruminants and long-term outcomes after surgery using a systematic review. The study aimed to give evidence-based data concerning prevalence and success rates after surgery. Materials and Methods: The analysis included 24 (total 239) peer-reviewed journal articles dealing with the prevalence of urolithiasis and 16 (total 39) concerning long-term outcomes after surgery. Literature was included if it referred to species, language, availability, and relevant statements to the specific questions, including the presence of control groups. Heterogeneity tests included Results: The prevalence of urolithiasis is strongly associated with feeding and may be calculated as 17% in corn-based rations and 62% in sorghum-based rations. Surgical interventions result in guarded to moderate long-term success rates of 15-66%. Urethral stoma and marsupialization of the bladder provide acceptable long-term success rates with 71-77% but are rather salvage techniques than accepted surgical methods, especially when used in companion animals. Conclusion: The development of urolithiasis is mainly influenced by nutrition. Effective prophylaxis of this disease should, therefore, always include advisory service for the owners. Existing surgical techniques should be critically re-evaluated concerning their long-term success rates.
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.