			Home About us Contact

Small Dogs (small + dog)

Distribution by Scientific Domains

Medical Sciences	75%

Selected Abstracts

Transarterial Coil Embolization of Patent Ductus Arteriosus in Small Dogs with 0.025-Inch Vascular Occlusion Coils: 10 Cases

JOURNAL OF VETERINARY INTERNAL MEDICINE, Issue 3 2004
Daniel F. Hogan
Patent ductus arteriosus (PDA) is the most common congenital cardiac disease in the dog and generally leads to severe clinical signs, including left-sided congestive heart failure. Historically, definitive treatment consisted of surgical ligation; however, the use of vascular occlusion devices by minimally invasive techniques has gained popularity in veterinary medicine during the past decade. Adequate vascular access is a major limiting factor for these minimally invasive techniques, precluding their use in very small dogs. The clinical management of PDA with 0.025-in vascular occlusion coils in a minimally invasive transarterial technique in 10 dogs is described. The dogs were small (1.38 ± 0.22 kg), were generally young (6.70 ± 5.74 months), and had small minimal ductal diameters (1.72 ± 0.81 mm from angiography). Vascular access was achieved, and coil deployment was attempted in all dogs with a 3F catheter uncontrolled release system. Successful occlusion, defined as no angiographic residual flow, was accomplished in 8 of 10 (80%) dogs. Successful occlusion was not achieved in 2 dogs (20%), and both dogs experienced embolization of coils into the pulmonary arterial tree. One of these dogs died during the procedure, whereas the other dog underwent a successful surgical correction. We conclude that transarterial PDA occlusion in very small dogs is possible with 0.025-in vascular occlusion coils by means of a 3F catheter system and that it represents a viable alternative to surgical ligation. The risk of pulmonary arterial embolization is higher with this uncontrolled release system, but this risk may decrease with experience. [source]

On the Weight-bearing Function of the Medial Coronoid Process in Dogs

ANATOMIA, HISTOLOGIA, EMBRYOLOGIA, Issue 1 2006
S. Breit
Summary The shape of and proportions between the surface areas of the medial coronoid process (MCP) and the fovea of the radial head were determined in 88 juvenile dogs and 146 adult dogs grouped as giant, large, mid-sized, chondrodystrophic, or small dogs. Thereby, the longitudinal (length) and transverse (width) extension of the MCP and fovea of the radial head have been measured. Original values were used to describe changes of the parameters attributed to growth. Normalized values (i.e. values expected in case of a width of the fovea of the radial head of 20 mm) were used to determine potential differences between constitutional types. All original values increased during growth (P < 0.05) except for the width and length of the MCP in chondrodystrophic and small breeds. Normalized values revealed a proportional decrease in width and length of the MCP during growth (P < 0.05) compared with the radial head. In adults, the normalized MCP was widest in giant dogs followed by large, mid-sized, small, and chondrodystrophic breeds. The MCP was also longest in giant dogs but shortest in large and chondrodystrophic dogs with those of large dogs being significantly (P < 0.05) shorter than those in giant, mid-sized and small dogs. Present results suggest that a deficiency in length-growth of the MCP , which has been present especially in large dogs , results in smaller humeral contact areas and decreased weight-bearing capacity of the MCP. Because loading forces acting on the MCP increase with body weight, the condition noted in large dogs might increase the risk of fragmentation of the MCP in these. [source]

Survey on small animal anaesthesia

AUSTRALIAN VETERINARY JOURNAL, Issue 9 2001
A NICHOLSON
Objective To ascertain anaesthetic practices used currently for dogs and cats in Australia. Methods A questionnaire was distributed to 4800 veterinarians throughout Australia, seeking data on numbers of dogs and cats anaesthetised per week; drug preferences for anaesthetic premedication, induction and maintenance; use of tracheal intubation, supplemental O2, nitrous oxide and anaesthetic antagonists; and types of vaporisers, breathing systems and anaesthetic monitoring devices used or available. Additional questions concerned proportions of different animal types seen in the practice, and the respondent's university and year of graduation. Results The response rate was 19%; 95% of respondents graduated from Australian universities, about half since 1985. Most responses (79%) came from mainly small animal practices. On average 16 dogs and 12 cats were anaesthetised each week. Premedication was used more often in dogs than cats, with acepromazine and atropine most favoured in both species. For anaesthetic induction, thiopentone was most preferred in dogs and alphaxalone/alphadolone in cats. Inhaled agents, especially halothane, were preferred for maintenance in both species. Most respondents usually employed tracheal intubation when using inhalational anaesthetic maintenance, but intubation rates were lower during injectable anaesthetic maintenance and a minority of respondents provided supplemental O2. Nitrous oxide was administered regularly by 13% of respondents. The agents most frequently used to speed recovery from anaesthesia were doxapram and yohimbine. The most widely used vaporisers were the Fluotec Mark III and the Stephens machine. Most (95%) respondents used a rebreathing circuit for large dogs and a non-rebreathing system was used for small dogs by 68% of respondents. Most respondents (93%) indicated some form of aid was available to monitor general anaesthesia: the three most mentioned were an apnoea alarm, oesophageal stethoscope and electrocardiogram. Conclusion Diverse approaches were evident, but there appeared to be less variation in anaesthetising dogs: premedication was more frequent and less varied in type, while thiobarbituates dominated for induction and inhalants for maintenance. Injectable maintenance techniques had substantial use in cats, but little in dogs. Evident disparity between vaporisers available and circuits used suggested either confusion in terminology or incorrect use of some vaporisers in-circuit. While most respondents used monitoring equipment or a dedicated observer to invigilate anaesthesia, the common reliance on apnoea alarms is of concern, because of unproven reliability and accuracy. [source]