Peer-reviewed veterinary case report
Risk factors for bladder stones in dogs with liver shunts
By G Caporali, Evelyn H et al.·Published in Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association·2015·Veterinary Teaching Hospital, 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 We do not publish original research — every detail traces back to the citation above.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: Risk factors for urolithiasis in dogs with congenital extrahepatic portosystemic shunts: 95 cases (1999-2013).
- Species:
- dog
Plain-English summary
A group of 95 dogs with a liver condition called congenital extrahepatic portosystemic shunts (EHPSS) were studied to find out if they were at risk for developing bladder stones (urolithiasis). The dogs, mostly young and some older, showed signs like crystalluria (crystals in urine), and about 36% had bladder stones made mostly of ammonium urate. The research found that male dogs, older dogs, and those who had previous medical treatment for EHPSS were more likely to develop these stones. Understanding these risk factors can help veterinarians monitor and manage affected dogs better.
People also search for: dog bladder stones treatment · EHPSS in dogs · why is my dog peeing crystals · male dog urinary problems · older dog bladder issues
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To identify risk factors for urolithiasis in dogs with congenital extrahepatic portosystemic shunts (EHPSSs) and to determine whether portoazygos shunts were associated with increased risk of urolithiasis at the initial evaluation for EHPSS. DESIGN: Retrospective case series. ANIMALS: Dogs (n = 95) with EHPSSs confirmed via CT angiography or surgery. PROCEDURES: Medical records from 1999 to 2013 were reviewed. Variables of interest included signalment, previous medical management, and results of urinalysis, urolith analyses, and diagnostic imaging. Univariable and multivariable logistic regression analyses for assessment of risk factors for urolithiasis at the time of initial EHPSS evaluation were performed. RESULTS: The dogs' median age was 0.9 years (range, 0.2 to 12.6 years). Among the 95 dogs, 27 (28.4%) and 68 (71.6%) had portoazygos and portocaval shunts, respectively. Urinalysis was performed for 79 (83.2%) dogs, 29 (36.7%) of which had crystalluria (mainly ammonium urate and struvite crystals). Uroliths were present in 34 of 95 (35.8%) dogs; 16 of 17 uroliths analyzed were composed of ammonium urate. Portoazygos shunts were not associated with significantly increased odds of urolithiasis at the time of the initial evaluation for EHPSS. However, the odds of urolithiasis was significantly increased for male dogs, older dogs, and dogs that received previous medical treatment. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: In dogs with EHPSS, shunt morphology was not associated with increased odds of urolithiasis at the initial evaluation. Male dogs, older dogs, and dogs having received medical management for EHPSS prior to initial evaluation should be considered at increased risk for development of urolithiasis.
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/25671285/