ReviewFrontiers in veterinary science2022
A Comparative Assessment of the Diagnosis of Swallowing Impairment and Gastroesophageal Reflux in Canines and Humans.
Review in Frontiers in veterinary science, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effect of novel metabotropic glutamate receptor 5 antagonist on gastroesophageal reflux in dogs during anaesthesia.The Journal of small animal practice · 2026Article
- Marmoset (Callithrix jacchus) Swallowing Physiology: Novel Dysphagia Model Across Lifespan.Integrative and comparative biology · 2026Article
- Functional dyspepsia: from human to dog, a retrospective study of 29 cases illustrating a complex entity.BMC veterinary research · 2025Article
- Development and feasibility study of a piezoresistive pressure sensor-based automated system for monitoring and controlling gastric pressure in endoscopy.Medical & biological engineering & computing · 2025Article
- Efficacy and Risk Assessment of Lateral Position Endotracheal Intubation Combined with Airway Surface Anesthesia in Gastrointestinal Endoscopic Surgery: A Randomized Controlled Non-Inferiority Study.Therapeutics and clinical risk management · 2025Article
- Endoscopic luminal impedance planimetry of the lower oesophageal sphincter and pylorus in experimental pigs: a pilot study.Journal of applied biomedicine · 2024Article
- The Effect of Tacrine on Functional Response of the Lower Oesophageal Sphincter Assessed by Endoscopic Luminal Impedance Planimetry in Experimental Pigs.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Prevalence and appropriateness of omeprazole prescription in dogs at a veterinary teaching hospital before and after the publication of the ACVIM consensus statement on the rational administration of gastrointestinal protectants.Frontiers in veterinary science · 2024Article
- Esophageal Candidiasis in Two Dogs With Megaesophagus: A Case Report.Journal of veterinary internal medicineArticle
- A One Health review of aerodigestive disease in dogs.Journal of veterinary internal medicineReview
- 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
5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Swallowing impairment is a highly prevalent and clinically significant problem affecting people and dogs. There are myriad causes of swallowing impairment of which gastroesophageal reflux is the most common in both species. Similarities in anatomy and physiology between humans and canines results in analogous swallowing disorders including cricopharyngeus muscle achalasia, esophageal achalasia, hiatal herniation, and gastroesophageal reflux with secondary esophagitis and esophageal dysmotility. Accordingly, the diagnostic approach to human and canine patients with swallowing impairment is similar. Diagnostic procedures such as swallowing fluoroscopy, high-resolution manometry, pH/impedance monitoring, and endolumenal functional luminal imaging probe can be performed in both species; however, nasofacial conformation, increased esophageal length, and the difficulty of completing several of these procedures in awake dogs are inherent challenges that need to be considered. Human patients can convey their symptoms and respond to verbal cues, whereas veterinarians must rely on clinical histories narrated by pet owners followed by comprehensive physical examination and observation of the animal eating different food consistencies and drinking water. Dogs may also be unwilling to drink or eat in the hospital setting and may be resistant to physical restraint during diagnostic procedures. Despite the species differences and diagnostic challenges, dogs are a natural animal model for many oropharyngeal and esophageal disorders affecting people, which presents a tremendous opportunity for shared learnings. This manuscript reviews the comparative aspects of esophageal anatomy and physiology between humans and canines, summarizes the diagnostic assessment of swallowing impairment in both species, and discusses future considerations for collaborative medicine and translational research.
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.