Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42511054›Full record

ArticleAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI2026

Comparison of Rectal and Intraoperative Findings in Horses with Colic.

Marie-Therese Schlote, Roswitha Merle, Sophie McCullagh, Bartlomiej Obrochta, Simon Hennessy, Miranda Dosi, Heidrun Gehlen

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Marie-Therese SchloteInstitute of Equine Internal Medicine, Freie Universität Berlin, Oertzenweg 19B, 14163 Berlin, Germany.
Roswitha MerleInstitute of Veterinary Epidemiology and Biostatistics, School of Veterinary Medicine, Freie Universität Berlin, 14163 Berlin, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-8688-2926
Sophie McCullaghRoyal Dick School of Veterinary Studies, University of Edinburgh, Scotland EH25 9RG, UK.
Bartlomiej ObrochtaEquine Hospital, Husaby Hästklinik, 533 95 Götene, Sweden.ORCID 0000-0002-1185-6176
Simon HennessyAnglesey Lodge Equine Hospital, R51HK85 Kildare, Ireland.
Miranda DosiRoyal Dick School of Veterinary Studies, University of Edinburgh, Scotland EH25 9RG, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-1094-1184
Heidrun GehlenInstitute of Equine Internal Medicine, Freie Universität Berlin, Oertzenweg 19B, 14163 Berlin, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-5451-4232

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Per rectum examination (PRE) is commonly used in the triage of horses with acute abdominal pain, despite reports of associated risk factors for both horses and personnel, but its diagnostic accuracy is questionable. This multicenter, observational study aimed to evaluate the agreement between PRE findings and surgical findings obtained via exploratory laparotomy in horses with colic. A total of 201 cases from four equine referral hospitals across Europe were included. Rectal findings were categorized as primary (most likely cause of colic) or additional. Agreement with surgical findings was assessed using kappa statistics. The influence of examiner demographic data (age, gender, and qualification status) on diagnostic accuracy was also evaluated. The agreement between primary rectal and primary surgical diagnosis was 57.2% (115/201; kappa coefficient, 0.490; 95% confidence interval, 0.394-0.586). When both primary and additional findings were considered, agreement increased to 71.6% (144/201, kappa coefficient, 0.720; 95% confidence interval, 0.156-0.927; 65.1-77.4%). The highest agreement was seen in cases of gas-distended large colon (90.3%), small intestinal distension (75.8%), and left dorsal displacement of the large colon (66.7%). Detection of small intestine distension in PRE had the highest sensitivity (85.7%) and negative predictive value (92.8%) among the evaluated parameters. Examiner demographics had no significant impact on diagnostic accuracy. PRE is a valuable but imperfect diagnostic tool. Given the dynamic nature of colic and possible changes between examination and surgery, some discrepancies are expected. Other variables, such as horse size or the examiner's hand dominance, were not investigated in this study but may have had an impact on the observed outcomes. Overall, PRE remains a practical, accessible technique that provides clinically useful information regardless of examiner experience.

Indexed as

abdominal paincolon torsionequine coliclaparotomyrectal examination

Identifiers

PMID42511054
PMCPMC13405891

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.