ArticleVeterinary surgery : VS2026
Computed tomography versus magnetic resonance imaging for the perioperative management of acute thoracolumbar intervertebral disc extrusion in non-ambulatory chondrodystrophic dogs.
Article in Veterinary surgery : VS, 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo determine whether perioperative management guided by conditional computed tomography-myelography (C-CTM) is non-inferior to magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) regarding functional outcome for acute thoracolumbar intervertebral disc extrusion (IVDE) in non-ambulatory chondrodystrophic dogs. STUDY
designQuasi-randomized natural experiment utilizing unscheduled MRI downtime as an exogenous instrument. SAMPLE POPULATION: A total of 560 client-owned dogs (MRI, 518 dogs; C-CTM, 42 dogs).
methodsA retrospective cohort study was conducted. The primary outcome was recovery of ambulation, analyzed with intention-to-treat (ITT) and per-protocol (PP) principles with a prespecified non-inferiority margin of -12%. Secondary outcomes included safety events (postoperative neurologic deterioration, progressive myelomalacia, major complications) and time-adjusted treatment costs.
resultsC-CTM was non-inferior to MRI for recovery of ambulation in both ITT (risk difference + 6.5%, 95% CI: -2.7%-15.7%, one-sided p < .001) and PP analyses (risk difference + 2.5%, 95% CI: -7.3%-12.2%, one-sided p < .001). There was no difference in rates of postoperative neurologic deterioration, progressive myelomalacia, or major complications. Total treatment costs and imaging costs were significantly lower for C-CTM (p < .01). There was no difference in non-imaging costs between groups.
conclusionIn non-ambulatory chondrodystrophic dogs with acute thoracolumbar IVDE, C-CTM is non-inferior to MRI for recovery of ambulation with a similar safety profile, at significantly lower cost. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: In dogs with a high pretest probability of acute thoracolumbar IVDE, routine use of MRI may not be justified given the comparable clinical outcomes and lower treatment costs achieved with C-CTM.
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.