Peer-reviewed veterinary case report
Aspiration pneumonia treatment in dogs with or without enrofloxacin
By Riffe, Cody I et al.·Published in Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association·2025·College of Veterinary Medicine and Biomedical 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 We do not publish original research — every detail traces back to the citation above.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: There is no significant difference in the treatment of aspiration pneumonia in dogs with ampicillin-sulbactam versus ampicillin-sulbactam and enrofloxacin.
- Species:
- dog
Plain-English summary
A group of dogs with aspiration pneumonia (a lung infection caused by inhaling food or liquid) was treated with either ampicillin-sulbactam alone or a combination of ampicillin-sulbactam and enrofloxacin. The study found that using just ampicillin-sulbactam was effective for many dogs, and there were no significant differences in recovery rates or severity of illness between those treated with one or both antibiotics. While some dogs needed a longer hospital stay when their treatment was escalated, overall, the simpler treatment option worked well for most.
People also search for: dog aspiration pneumonia treatment · ampicillin-sulbactam for dogs · enrofloxacin for pneumonia in dogs
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Describe outcomes for dogs with aspiration pneumonia (AP) initially treated with ampicillin-sulbactam (AS) alone (monotherapy [MT]), initially with AS and enrofloxacin (initial dual therapy [iDT]), or initially with AS and later escalating with enrofloxacin (escalated dual therapy [eDT]). METHODS: Retrospective review of dogs hospitalized at a teaching hospital for AP between 2010 and 2022. Inclusion criteria included consistent historical and thoracic radiographic findings and subsequent treatment with MT, iDT, or eDT. Exclusion criteria included radiographic findings suggesting other pulmonary pathologies, aspiration while hospitalized, antibiotic use in the prior month, or referral for comorbidities. Demographics, weight, vital signs, laboratory data, thoracic radiographs, lung lobes affected, antibiotic timing, and hospitalization details were recorded. Shock index, systemic inflammatory response syndrome criteria, and quick sequential organ failure assessment scores were calculated. RESULTS: 58 dogs met inclusion criteria. A total of 40 dogs were started on AS alone; 27 dogs were assigned to MT (46.6%). Thirteen dogs were later escalated (eDT; 22.4%). Eighteen dogs (31%) received iDT. The dogs that were escalated had significantly longer hospital stays. However, no significant differences were observed in lung lobes affected, survival to discharge, disease severity indices, and total leukocyte counts across the 3 groups. No differences were found between survivors and nonsurvivors. CONCLUSIONS: Ampicillin-sulbactam alone is an effective treatment for a substantial proportion of dogs with AP. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Empirical treatment with MT is likely appropriate for dogs with AP lacking signs of critical illness. In dogs for which eDT was deemed clinically necessary, outcomes are not worse.
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/40341179/