Evaluation of the rate of development of septic arthritis after elective arthroscopy in horses: 7 cases (1994–2003)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To determine the rate of development of septic arthritis after elective arthroscopy and evaluate associations between various factors and development of this complication in horses. DESIGN: Retrospective case series. ANIMALS: 682 horses that underwent arthroscopic procedures at the University of Illinois Veterinary Teaching Hospital from 1994 to 2003. PROCEDURES: Information pertaining to signalment, joints treated, whether antimicrobials were administered, and development of postoperative septic arthritis was collected from medical records. Horses with a primary problem of septic arthritis or wounds involving joints were excluded. The following factors were evaluated to determine their roles in joint sepsis: breed, sex, joint, and preoperative and intra-articular administration of antimicrobials. Telephone interviews with clients were used to determine whether unreported septic arthritis had developed. RESULTS: 8 of 932 (0.9%) joints in 7 of 682 (1.0%) horses that underwent arthroscopy developed postoperative septic arthritis. Follow-up information after discharge from the hospital was available for 461 of the 682 horses, and of those, 8 of 627 (1.3%) joints in 7 of 461 (1.5%) horses developed septic arthritis. Breed and joint treated were significant risk factors for development of postoperative septic arthritis, with draft breeds and tibiotarsal joints more likely than others to be affected. Sex, preoperatively administered antimicrobials, and intra-articularly administered antimicrobials were not associated with development of postoperative septic arthritis. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Results can be used for comparison with data from other institutions and surgical facilities. Additional precautions should be undertaken when arthroscopic surgery involves draft breeds and tibiotarsal joints.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".