Successful treatment of <i>Pseudescherichia vulneris</i>‐associated acute haemorrhagic diarrhoea with a single faecal microbiota transplantation in a dog
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract An 8‐year‐4‐month‐old, female, neutered labrador retriever with acute haemorrhagic diarrhoea was unresponsive to symptomatic and antibiotic treatment, and developed gastrointestinal protein loss leading to significant hypoalbuminaemia. A single faecal microbiota transplantation from a healthy donor was given by rectal retention enema. Microbiome 16S rRNA sequencing of the recipient's faecal sample before the faecal microbiota transplantation revealed dysbiosis characterised by high abundance of Pseudescherichia vulneris, and significantly reduced microbial diversity and richness. This normalised 1 day after faecal microbiota transplantation, with dramatic reduction of P. vulneris and a significant increase in health‐associated bacteria like Peptacetobacter hiranonis, Fusobacterium mortiferum and Faecalibacterium prausnitzii. Microbiota diversity and richness also significantly improved after faecal microbiota transplantation. The dog improved clinically with no further treatment and had no relapse of clinical signs by 1‐year follow‐up. Faecal microbiota transplantation should be considered a valid adjunctive treatment for canine cases with protracted acute haemorrhagic diarrhoea, even in the presence of gastrointestinal protein loss.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".