ArticleEquine veterinary journal2025
Computed tomography of the equine caudal spine and pelvis. Pathological findings in 56 clinical cases (2018-2023).
Article in Equine veterinary journal, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Multi-Detector Helical Computer Tomography, Transrectal Ultrasonography and Histology of the Lumbosacral Area: A Comparative Study in Warmblood Horse Cadavers.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2026Article
- Computed tomography of the equine caudal spine and pelvis: Technique, image quality and anatomical variation in 56 clinical cases (2018-2023).Equine veterinary journal · 2025Article
- Computed tomography of the equine caudal spine and pelvis. Pathological findings in 56 clinical cases (2018-2023).Equine veterinary journal · 2025Article
- Multi-Detector Helical Computed Tomography, Transrectal Ultrasonography, and Histology of the Sacroiliac Joint: A Comparative Study in Adult Warmblood Horse Cadavers.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundComputed tomography (CT) of the axial skeleton is increasing across many equine hospitals. CT of the pelvis and caudal spine in a large group of clinical cases has not been reported previously.
objectiveTo describe the pathological lesions identified in the caudal spine/pelvis in horses and ponies undergoing CT spine of this region. STUDY
designA retrospective case series.
methodsHorses with CT imaging of the caudal spine/pelvis were included. Horses aged under 6 months and those with CT examinations performed post-mortem were excluded.
resultsFifty-six horses met the inclusion criteria. Ages ranged from 8 months to 20 years and bodyweights from 85 to 680 kg (mean 488 kg). Horses presented predominantly for lameness (30/56) and poor performance (18/56). Osseous pathology was identified in 41/56 horses; including osteoarthritis of the sacroiliac joint(s) (n: 28), pathology of the intervertebral disc joint(s) (n: 12), pelvic fractures (n: 9), osteoarthritis of the coxofemoral joint(s) (n: 8), ventral spondylosis (n: 6), acetabular rim fracture (n: 2), dislocation of coxofemoral joint(s) (n: 2), and dorsal dermal sinus of the sacrum (n: 1). MAIN LIMITATIONS: The relationship between CT imaging findings and clinical signs in horses remains unclear. Further work is required to describe the relationship between congenital, developmental, and acquired changes in the caudal spine and pelvis, and clinical signs.
conclusionsCT of the caudal spine and pelvis can be utilised in horses and ponies for diagnosing a range of clinical disorders that may be causing 'lumbosacroiliac pain', poor performance, hindlimb lameness, and stiffness. The pathologies we observed were diverse and many patients had multiple lesions.
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.