Detrusor urethral dyssynergy in dogs: 35 cases (2007‐2019)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate clinical presentation, diagnosis, treatment and outcome of dogs diagnosed with detrusor urethral dyssynergy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Multicentre (n = 3 UK referral clinics), retrospective, observational study. Database searches were performed (2007 to 2019) to identify dogs with detrusor urethral dyssynergy. Dogs with structural abnormalities or detectable neurological disorders affecting micturition were excluded. Clinical presentation, diagnostic procedures, treatment and outcome were evaluated. RESULTS: Thirty-five dogs were included. Middle-aged, large-breed, male neutered dogs were most frequently documented. Four female dogs were included. Fifteen breeds, including Labrador retrievers (8/35; 22.9%), golden retrievers (5/35;14.3%) and cross-breeds (5/35; 14.3%) were identified. Median duration of clinical signs was 152 days (range 0 to 1095). All dogs were dysuric at presentation with 17/35 (48.6%) reported to have an altered stream of urine and 17/35 (48.6%) to be stranguric. Follow-up data were available for 34 dogs (median 136 days, range 4 to 2188). Response was classified as good (20/34; 58.8%), partial (7/34; 20.5%) or poor (7/34; 20.5%). Overall time to response was known for 21 of 34 dogs (partial n = 6, good n = 15) with a median of 11 days (range 1 to 155). Four dogs had surgical intervention (castration n = 4, cystostomy tube n = 2). Three dogs were euthanased due to partial (n = 1) or poor (n = 2) response. Medications were discontinued in 11 of 20 (55.0%) dogs with a good response to therapy, two of these relapsed. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Detrusor urethral dyssynergy is an uncommon micturition disorder in dogs, in particular females. Medical therapy with or without surgery resulted in a favourable prognosis in the majority of dogs, although many require long-term medication.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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".