Peer-reviewed veterinary case report
How extrahepatic portosystemic shunt types affect dogs' symptoms
By Kraun, Michael B et al.·Published in Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association·2014·Department of Small Animal Clinical Sciences, United States·View original on PubMed →
PetCaseFinder translated the abstract of this peer-reviewed paper into plain English so pet owners can read it. We do not publish original research — every detail traces back to the citation above. How we work →
Original publication title: Analysis of the relationship of extrahepatic portosystemic shunt morphology with clinical variables in dogs: 53 cases (2009-2012).
- Species:
- dog
Plain-English summary
A group of 53 dogs with a condition called extrahepatic portosystemic shunts (EHPSSs) were studied to understand how different types of shunts affected their health. Dogs with a specific type of shunt called splenocaval showed more health problems, including neurological issues, compared to those with other types. The study found that dogs with shunts that connected to the vena cava below the liver were more likely to show symptoms. Understanding these differences can help veterinarians provide better care for dogs with EHPSSs.
People also search for: dog portosystemic shunt symptoms · EHPSS treatment in dogs · dog neurological signs with liver shunt
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To investigate differences in clinical variables among dogs with extrahepatic portosystemic shunts (EHPSSs) of various morphologies. DESIGN: Retrospective case series. ANIMALS: 53 dogs with EHPSSs. PROCEDURES: Medical records of dogs undergoing preoperative CT angiography of an EHPSS over a 3-year period were reviewed. Analysis was performed to investigate relationships of clinical variables with shunt morphology. Morphologies were analyzed individually as well as in several groups. RESULTS: Shunt morphologies included 10 splenocaval, 9 splenophrenic, 11 splenoazygos, 10 right gastric-caval, 12 right gastric-caval with a caudal loop, and 1 right gastric-azygos with a caudal loop. Several biochemical variables associated with EHPSS were lowest in dogs with splenocaval shunts. Preoperative clinical signs were more common in dogs that had shunts with vena caval than right azygos vein insertion (36/41 [88%] vs 7/12 [58%]) and insertion caudal to the liver than diaphragmatic insertion (29/32 [91%] vs 14/21 [67%]). Neurologic signs were more common when shunts inserted into the vena cava caudal to the liver than in other locations (21/32 [66%] vs 6/21 [29%]) and were most frequent with splenocaval shunts. Urinary tract signs were more common when shunts had right gastric vein origin than gastrosplenic vein origin (14/23 [61%] vs 10/30 [33%]). CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Splenocaval shunts caused more clinical abnormalities than did other shunt morphologies. Results suggested that dogs with shunt insertion in the caudal vena cava, especially caudal to the liver, were most likely to have clinical signs.
Find similar cases for your pet
PetCaseFinder finds other peer-reviewed reports of pets with the same symptoms, plus a plain-English summary of what was tried across them.
Search related cases →Original publication on PubMed: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25148096/