Peer-reviewed veterinary case report
Fluid overload causing breathing trouble in male cats with blocked
By Ostroski, Cassandra J et al.·Published in Journal of veterinary emergency and critical care (San Antonio, Tex. : 2001)·2017·Department of 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 We do not publish original research — every detail traces back to the citation above.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: Retrospective evaluation of and risk factor analysis for presumed fluid overload in cats with urethral obstruction: 11 cases (2002-2012).
- Species:
- cat
Plain-English summary
A male cat with urethral obstruction (UO) developed breathing problems due to suspected fluid overload after receiving IV fluids. The cat was hospitalized longer and incurred higher treatment costs compared to other cats with UO that did not experience fluid overload. An echocardiogram revealed heart disease in most of the affected cats, and those who received a fluid bolus were more likely to develop breathing issues. Fortunately, while the treatment was more complicated and expensive, it did not lead to increased mortality.
People also search for: cat urethral obstruction treatment · cat breathing problems after IV fluids · fluid overload in cats · cat heart murmur causes · cat hospitalization costs
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To describe patient characteristics, treatment, and outcome in male cats with urethral obstruction (UO) and fluid overload (FO), and to determine risk factors for the development of FO. DESIGN: Retrospective case-control study from 2002-2012. ANIMALS: Eleven client-owned cats with UO that developed respiratory distress secondary to suspected FO and 51 control cats with UO without FO. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Medical records of cats with UO and FO were identified. FO was defined as the development of respiratory distress secondary to pleural effusion or pulmonary edema while receiving IV fluids. To identify risk factors for FO, variables for cats that developed FO were compared with variables from a randomly selected control group of unaffected UO cats during the same time period. Variables analyzed included patient signalment, previous medical history, serum biochemical data, respiratory rate, cardiac auscultation abnormalities, admission systolic blood pressure, intravenous fluid administration, thoracic imaging, treatment, duration and cost of hospitalization, and outcome. Echocardiogram identified heart disease in 5/6 cats with FO. Cost (2.9 times as much) and median duration of hospitalization (4.1 vs 1.8 days) were significantly greater in cats with FO. Cats with FO were more likely to have received a fluid bolus (odds ratio [OR]: 5.1; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.3, 20, P = 0.014), developed a heart murmur (OR: 4.5; 95% CI, 1.1-18, P = 0.028) or a gallop sound (OR: 75; 95% CI, 8.1-694, P < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: FO is a possible complication of the treatment of UO. The administration of a fluid bolus on presentation, and the development of a heart murmur or gallop sound during treatment were the most clinically useful risk factors identified. The development of FO is associated with significant increases in both the cost and length of hospitalization, but was not associated with increased mortality.
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/28752928/