Search

In emergency veterinary practice, gastrointestinal foreign body (GFB) removal is a common procedure that is performed with different techniques, such as endoscopy or surgery. The aims of this retrospective, multicentre, clinical study were to report the common locations and types of objects recovered and to investigate clinical factors and outcomes in dogs after surgical or endoscopic treatment for GFB removal. Records of dogs with a GFB diagnosis referred to the Teaching Veterinary Hospital or treated in three different veterinary hospitals from September 2017 to September 2019 were examined. The data obtained from each case included breed, age, clinical signs at presentation, duration of clinical signs, type and location of the GFB, treatment, length of hospitalisation and outcome. Seventy-two dogs were enrolled in the study. There were 42 males (58%) and 30 females (42%). The median age was 36 months (range: 3 months to 8 years). Endoscopic retrieval was performed in 56% of GFBs (located in the stomach or duodenum), whereas 44% of dogs underwent surgery. The type of FB detected varied greatly: kid toy (14%), metallic object/coin (13%), cloth (13%), sock (8%), ball (8%), plastic material (8%), peach stone (7%), fishhook (6%), sewing needle (4%), hair tie (4%), pacifier (3%), plant materials (3%) and others (9%). Moreover, the FBs were classified as sharp (13%, n = 9), pointed (33%, n = 24), blunt (26%, n = 19), or linear (28%, n = 20). In this study, 68% of FBs were localised in the stomach, 25% in the intestinal tract (50% duodenum, 28% jejunum, and 22% ileum), and 7% in both the stomach and small intestine. The type of GFB was not significantly associated with age, site or breed. There was a significant association between the type of GFB and sex: if the dog was male, there was a 38% probability of ingesting linear GFBs. The dog survival rate was 100% in cases treated by gastric endoscopic or surgical removal, 94% in cases treated with enterotomy and 33% in cases in which enterectomy was necessary. Enterectomy and multiple surgical sites were associated with a poor outcome. The presence of vomiting for more than 24 h was significantly associated with death.

Force plate analysis assesses gait symmetry and limb loading. However, as previously described, individual and breed variability (body size and conformation) is related to breeding, body conformation, and size. This prospective study aimed to evaluate the influence of morphometric measures on the speed (V), peak of vertical force (PVF), vertical impulse (VI), and stance time (ST) in healthy dolichomorph and mesomorph dogs and their combined effect on and interactions with V, PVF, VI, and ST in the same morphological types. Fifty dogs were enrolled in the current study, and specific morphometric measurements were recorded for each dog. A force platform was used to record the ground reaction forces (GFRs), including PVF and VI. Multiple linear regression models were used for the study purposes. According to our results, GFRs are influenced by morphometric measures (body weight, withers height, and speed) not so much as a single contribution, but by the interaction between them. It is not possible to compare GFRs in dogs that do not belong to the same breed. However, the subjective variabilities make this comparison difficult and poorly reliable. According to the author, the comparison should be made between canine morphological types rather than breeds.