Objective—To determine the effects of body position on intraocular pressure (IOP) in dogs without glaucoma.
Animals—24 healthy dogs with no evidence of glaucoma.
Procedures—Dogs underwent ophthalmic examinations to ensure that no IOP-affecting ocular diseases were present. Each dog was sequentially placed in dorsal recumbency, sternal recumbency, and sitting position. For each of the 3 positions, IOP in the right eye was measured by use of an applanation tonometer immediately after positioning (0 minutes) and after 3 and 5 minutes had elapsed. The initial body position was randomly assigned; each position followed the other positions an equal number of times, and IOP measurements were initiated immediately after moving from one body position to the next. Proparacaine hydrochloride (0.5%) was applied to the right eye immediately prior to IOP measurements.
Results—Intraocular pressure was affected by body position. During the 5-minute examination, IOP decreased significantly in dogs that were dorsally recumbent or sitting but did not change significantly in dogs that were sternally recumbent. For the 3 positions, overall mean IOP differed significantly at each time point (0, 3, and 5 minutes). Mean IOP in dorsal recumbency was significantly higher than that in sternal recumbency at 0 and at 3 minutes; although the former was also higher than that in sitting position at 3 minutes, that difference was not significant.
Conclusions and Clinical Relevance—Body position affects IOP in dogs. When IOP is measured in dogs, body position should be recorded and consistent among repeat evaluations.
Procedures—Cats were physically and echocardiographically examined by 2 investigators independently. Left ventricular wall thickness was determined via 2-dimensional echocardiography in short-axis and long-axis planes. Left ventricular hypertrophy was identified when end-diastolic measurements of the interventricular septum or posterior wall were ≥ 6 mm. Cats with left ventricular hypertrophy but without left ventricular dilatation were considered to have hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM). The associations between heart murmurs and Doppler echocardiographic velocity profiles indicative of dynamic ventricular outflow tract obstruction were evaluated.
Results—Heart murmurs were detected in 16 (15.5%; 95% confidence interval, 9.2% to 24.0%) cats; of these, 5 had cardiomyopathy. Cardiomyopathy was also identified in 16 (15.5%; 95% confidence interval, 9.2% to 24.0%) cats; 15 had HCM, and 1 had arrhythmogenic right ventricular cardiomyopathy. Of the cats with HCM, 11 had segmental left ventricular hypertrophy, 3 had diffuse left ventricular hypertrophy, and 1 had borderline left ventricular hypertrophy with marked systolic anterior motion of the mitral valve. Sensitivity and specificity of auscultatory detection of a heart murmur for diagnosing cardiomyopathy were 31% and 87%, respectively. Echocardiographic evidence of late systolic acceleration within ventricular outflow tracts was associated with the existence of a heart murmur.
Conclusions and Clinical Relevance—Cardiomyopathy was common in the healthy cats evaluated in this study. In apparently healthy cats, detection of a heart murmur is not a reliable indicator of cardiomyopathy.
Objective—To evaluate the effect of frequent milkout
(FMO) on the outcome of experimentally induced
Escherichia coli mastitis in cows.
Design—Randomized complete block study.
Animals—16 Holstein dairy cows.
Procedure—Cows were randomly assigned to 1 of 4
groups and were either not infected and not treated
(NI-NT), experimentally infected with E coli and not
treated (EC-NT), not infected and FMO (NI-FMO), or
experimentally infected with E coli and FMO (EC-FMO).
The infected quarter in cows in FMO groups
was milked out every 4 hours from 16 to 36 hours and
every 6 hours from 36 to 84 hours after challenge,
with the aid of oxytocin administration. Somatic cell
counts (SCC); times to bacterial, clinical, and systemic
cures; and serum concentrations of α-lactalbumin
Results—Use of FMO did not appear to affect SCC.
For EC-NT and EC-FMO groups, mean bacterial cure
times were 203 and 159 hours, clinical cure times
were 276 and 360 hours, and systemic cure times
were 144 and 159 hours, respectively; these times
were not significantly different. Concentrations of
α-lactalbumin were significantly increased in the EC-NT
group at 12 hours and in the NI-FMO group at 36
and 60 hours after challenge, compared with values
of cows in other treatment groups.
Conclusions and Clinical Relevance—Compared
with results in control cows, FMO does not appear to
be an efficacious treatment for experimentally
induced moderate to severe E coli mastitis. (J Am Vet
Med Assoc 2003;222:63–66)
Objective—To measure minimum inhibitory concentrations
(MIC) of 17 antimicrobials for Escherichia coli
isolates from a turkey operation and assess whether
small samples provide precise estimates of geometric
Sample Population—105 clinical isolates from birds
and 1,104 fecal isolates from 20 flocks (poults and finisher
Procedure—A Mueller-Hinton broth dilution panel
was used to measure MIC, and MIC of fecal and
clinical isolates were compared. We drew random
samples of 5, 10, 15, 20, 25, 30, 35, 40, and 45 isolates
from each finisher flock and between 100 and
105 isolates from 5, 7, 10, and 20 flocks.
Antimicrobial usage was determined for enrolled
Results—Six of 12 poult and 18 of 20 finisher
flocks had been treated with antimicrobials, often
for respiratory illnesses consistent with colibacillosis.
All birds received gentamicin at the hatchery.
More fecal than clinical isolates were resistant to
ampicillin; however, more clinical isolates were
resistant to ciprofloxacin, gentamicin, and sulfamethoxazole.
Precise estimates of geometric
mean MIC for flocks were obtained when ≥ 15
fecal isolates were obtained per flock and, for the
operation, when 105 isolates were obtained from ≥
Conclusions and Clinical Relevance—Antimicrobial
usage was common and may have contributed to the
resistance patterns of isolates. With a modest allocation
of laboratory resources, producers can monitor
antimicrobial susceptibilities of clinical and fecal E coli
to manage risks of antimicrobial usage and resistance.
(J Am Vet Med Assoc 2002;221:411–416)