Treatment of intrahepatic congenital portosystemic shunts in dogs: a systematic review

The aim of this study was to establish the evidence base for the treatment of intrahepatic congenital portosystemic shunts in dogs through a systematic review of the pertinent literature. Studies were filtered for evidence to answer the question “Which of the treatment options for intrahepatic CPSS in dogs offers the best short‐ and long‐term outcome?” Studies were assigned a level of evidence based on a system published by the Oxford Centre for Evidence‐Based Medicine. Thirty‐two studies were included in the review. Twenty‐six provided level 4 evidence and six provided level 5 evidence. There were no level 1, 2 or 3 studies. One study compared surgical treatment with medical management and one study compared suture ligation with ameroid constrictor placement. The remaining studies were case series describing the outcome for one treatment method alone. Methods and timings of assessments of short‐ and long‐term outcomes were highly varied, making direct comparisons challenging. The evidence regarding the treatment of intrahepatic congenital portosystemic shunts in dogs is weak, with only two studies directly comparing treatments. There is a lack of evidence regarding short‐ and long‐term outcomes on which to base clinical decisions

Intrahepatic congenital portosystemic shunts in dogs: short- and long-term outcome of suture attenuation

Retrospective cohort study of dogs surgically treated for intrahepatic congenital portosystemic shunts between February 2000 and March 2015. Long-term follow-up was conducted by telephone conversations with the referring veterinary surgeon, owner, or both

Treatment of congenital extrahepatic portosystemic shunts in dogs : a systematic review and meta‐analysis

Background Several options have been proposed for the treatment of congenital extrahepatic portosystemic shunts (cEHPSS) in dogs, but formal comparisons among different treatment options are currently unavailable. A previous evidence-based review (2012) found low quality of evidence for papers assessing the treatment of cEHPSS in dogs. Objectives To assess the quality of evidence available in the treatment of cEHPSS, summarize the current state of knowledge with respect to outcome after cEHPSS management, and compare different treatment techniques. Animals Not used. Methods A bibliographic search was performed without date or language restrictions. Studies were assessed for quality of evidence (study design, study group sizes, subject enrollment quality, and overall risk of bias) and outcome measures reported (perioperative outcome, clinical outcome, and surgical or interventional outcome), all reported with 95% confidence intervals. A network meta-analysis was performed. Results Forty-eight studies were included. Six retrospective studies (grade 4b) compared 2 techniques and 7 were abstracts (grade 5). The quality of evidence was low and risk of bias high. Regarding surgical outcome, statistically significant superiority of ameroid constrictor over thin film band was observed (P = .003). No other comparisons were statistically significant. Conclusions and Clinical Importance The evidence base of choice of treatment of cEHPSS in dogs remains weak despite recent publications on the subject. Ameroid is superior to thin film band in causing EHPSS closure. Blinded randomized studies comparing different treatment modalities, which routinely include postoperative imaging to assess cEHPSS closure and acquired portosystemic shunt development are essential

Challenges of Cardiopulmonary Bypass—A Review of the Veterinary Literature

Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/96252/1/vsu1008.pd