Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Treatment of congenital extrahepatic portosystemic shunts in dogs: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Serrano, Gonçalo; Charalambous, Marios; Devriendt, Nausikaa; de Rooster, Hilde; Mortier, Femke; Paepe, Dominique.
Afiliación
  • Serrano G; Small Animal Department, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium.
  • Charalambous M; Small Animal Department, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium.
  • Devriendt N; Small Animal Department, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium.
  • de Rooster H; Small Animal Department, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium.
  • Mortier F; Small Animal Department, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium.
  • Paepe D; Small Animal Department, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium.
J Vet Intern Med ; 33(5): 1865-1879, 2019 Sep.
Article en En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31471995
BACKGROUND: Several options have been proposed for the treatment of congenital extrahepatic portosystemic shunts (cEHPSS) in dogs, but formal comparisons among different treatment options are currently unavailable. A previous evidence-based review (2012) found low quality of evidence for papers assessing the treatment of cEHPSS in dogs. OBJECTIVES: To assess the quality of evidence available in the treatment of cEHPSS, summarize the current state of knowledge with respect to outcome after cEHPSS management, and compare different treatment techniques. ANIMALS: Not used. METHODS: A bibliographic search was performed without date or language restrictions. Studies were assessed for quality of evidence (study design, study group sizes, subject enrollment quality, and overall risk of bias) and outcome measures reported (perioperative outcome, clinical outcome, and surgical or interventional outcome), all reported with 95% confidence intervals. A network meta-analysis was performed. RESULTS: Forty-eight studies were included. Six retrospective studies (grade 4b) compared 2 techniques and 7 were abstracts (grade 5). The quality of evidence was low and risk of bias high. Regarding surgical outcome, statistically significant superiority of ameroid constrictor over thin film band was observed (P = .003). No other comparisons were statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPORTANCE: The evidence base of choice of treatment of cEHPSS in dogs remains weak despite recent publications on the subject. Ameroid is superior to thin film band in causing EHPSS closure. Blinded randomized studies comparing different treatment modalities, which routinely include postoperative imaging to assess cEHPSS closure and acquired portosystemic shunt development are essential.
Asunto(s)
Palabras clave
Texto completo
Añadir a Mi BVS
Imprimir
XML
PubMed Links
Buscar en Google

Texto completo: 1 Colección: 01-internacional Base de datos: MEDLINE Asunto principal: Sistema Porta / Enfermedades de los Perros Tipo de estudio: Observational_studies / Risk_factors_studies / Systematic_reviews Límite: Animals Idioma: En Revista: J Vet Intern Med Asunto de la revista: MEDICINA INTERNA / MEDICINA VETERINARIA Año: 2019 Tipo del documento: Article País de afiliación: Bélgica Pais de publicación: Estados Unidos
Texto completo
Añadir a Mi BVS
Imprimir
XML
PubMed Links
Buscar en Google

Texto completo: 1 Colección: 01-internacional Base de datos: MEDLINE Asunto principal: Sistema Porta / Enfermedades de los Perros Tipo de estudio: Observational_studies / Risk_factors_studies / Systematic_reviews Límite: Animals Idioma: En Revista: J Vet Intern Med Asunto de la revista: MEDICINA INTERNA / MEDICINA VETERINARIA Año: 2019 Tipo del documento: Article País de afiliación: Bélgica Pais de publicación: Estados Unidos