ArticleBMC veterinary research2022
Investigation of two different human d-dimer assays in the horse.
Article in BMC veterinary research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundD-dimer has value as a marker of thrombosis in critically ill horses and can provide additional information about prognosis. However, there are currently no equine species-specific d-dimer assays available, nor has there been any formal investigation of the applicability of human d-dimer assays in horses, so it is unknown, which assay performs best in this species. The aim of this study was therefore to evaluate and compare two human d-dimer assays for their applicability in horses. The study included four groups of horses: clinically healthy horses, horses with gastrointestinal (GI) disease and mild systemic inflammation based on low serum amyloid A (SAA) (low SAA group), horses with GI disease and strong systemic inflammation based on high SAA (high SAA group) and, horses with thrombotic GI disease caused by Strongylus vulgaris (also called non-strangulating intestinal infarction (NSII)) (NSII group). The assays evaluated were the STAGO STA-Liatest D-di + (Stago) and NycoCard™ D-dimer (NycoCard). Intra- and inter-coefficients of variation (CV) were assessed on two d-dimer concentrations, and linearity under dilution was evaluated. A group comparison was performed for both assays across the four groups of horses. A Spaghetti plot, Spearman Correlation, Passing Bablok regression and Bland-Altman plot were used to compare methods in terms of agreement.
resultsTen horses were included in the clinically healthy group, eight in the low SAA group, eight in the high SAA group, and seven in the NSII group. For the Stago assay, intra- and inter-CVs were below the accepted level except for one inter-CV. The NycoCard assay did not meet the accepted level for any of the CVs. The linearity under dilution was acceptable for both the Stago and NycoCard. In the group comparison, both methods detected a significantly higher d-dimer concentration in the high SAA and NSII groups compared to the clinically healthy group. Method agreement showed slightly higher d-dimer concentrations with NycoCard compared to Stago. The overall agreement was stronger for the lower d-dimer concentrations.
conclusionBoth the Stago and the NycoCard were found to be applicable for use in horses but were not directly comparable.
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.