ArticleAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI2026
Gastrointestinal Phytobezoars in Small Animals: A Retrospective Study of 18 Cases.
Article in Animals : an open access journal from MDPI, 2026. 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.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
A phytobezoar is a compact mass formed by the accumulation of indigestible food fibers (such as cellulose and lignin) within the stomach and/or intestine. To date, only limited reports describe the clinical management and diagnostic approach to gastrointestinal phytobezoars (GIPs) in dogs and cats. The aim of this study was to describe the clinical features and diagnostic findings obtained through imaging and instrumental investigations in canine and feline cases with GIPs. Medical records of 25 animals diagnosed with GIPs were reviewed, and data on signalment, clinical signs, imaging findings, and follow-up were collected. Seven animals were excluded because the foreign body (FB) consisted of plastic mixed with fibrous material. Eighteen animals (17 dogs and 1 cat) were included: 8 (44.4%) with gastric involvement, 8 (44.4%) with intestinal localization and 2 (11.1%) with both gastric and intestinal localization. The GIP was removed endoscopically in 3 (16.7%) cases, surgically in 7 (38.9%) cases, extracted from the rectal ampulla in 2 (11.1%) cases, and expelled spontaneously through defecation in 6 (33.3%) cases. GIPs are frequently underdiagnosed, as they are associated with nonspecific gastrointestinal signs. Radiography and ultrasonography offer limited diagnostic value, generally suggesting the presence of an FB without definitively confirming it to be GIP. This study contributes to the current literature by detailing the clinical, diagnostic, and interventional features of GIPs in small animals, representing the first report of this condition in veterinary medicine.
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.