ArticleVeterinary surgery : VS2025
Recurrence of cervical intervertebral disc extrusion in 55 dogs after surgical decompression with or without prophylactic fenestration.
Article in Veterinary surgery : VS, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Recurrence of cervical intervertebral disc extrusion in 55 dogs after surgical decompression with or without prophylactic fenestration.Veterinary surgery : VS · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo determine whether prophylactic fenestration (PF) of adjacent intervertebral discs decreases the recurrence rate (RR) of cervical intervertebral disc extrusion (C-IVDE) in small dogs undergoing ventral slot (VS) decompression, and whether PF increases perioperative complication risk. STUDY
designRetrospective, multi-institutional cohort study. SAMPLE POPULATION: A total of 55 dogs.
methodsMedical records of a mixed population of small dogs (<20 kg) treated with VS for C-IVDE with a minimum one-year follow-up were reviewed. During surgery, dogs underwent either single-site PF, multiple-site PF, or no PF. Perioperative complication rate and RR were compared between PF and non-PF groups using generalized linear models. Surgical time and neurologic grade (presurgery, post-surgery, at first recheck) were compared with Mann-Whitney test and chi-squared tests.
resultsA total of 55 dogs were included (PF: n = 18; non-PF: n = 37). Neurologic grades were similar at all timepoints. Median time to first recheck was 14 days (range: 5-56). Median follow-up time was 1380 days (range: 365-2777). Recurrence occurred in 25% of dogs (14/55), all in the non-PF group. Prophylactic fenestration was associated with a lower RR (p < .001). Surgery duration was longer in the PF group (158.0 ± 13.5 min) versus non-PF (118.0 ± 6.8 min, p = .017), but complication rates were similar (18.2%, p = .838) between groups.
conclusionRecurrence of C-IVDE is more likely to occur at non-PF group than PF-group in a heterogenous population of small breed dogs. Prophylactic fenestration was not linked to increased complication risk. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Prophylactic fenestration might be safely considered to prevent C-IVDE recurrence.
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.