Intra-articular organisms are not always cytologically detectable in dogs with blastomycosis-associated inflammatory arthritis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: To describe the clinical, cytologic, and radiographic features of inflammatory arthritis associated with blastomycosis in dogs. Methods: This study included 12 dogs with blastomycosis and cytologic evidence of inflammation in at least 1 joint identified at a tertiary referral center over a 25-year period. Median age of presentation was 5.0 (1.1 to 9.0) years, and 4 of 12 cases were Labrador Retrievers. Musculoskeletal signs were the primary complaint for 10 dogs, while the other 2 presented for respiratory concerns. All dogs were lame upon evaluation, and 10 of 12 had palpable joint swelling. All dogs had evidence of blastomycosis in at least 1 other body system. Results: Of 25 joint fluid cytologies, interpretations consisted of inflammatory arthritis in 21 joints (12 dogs), degenerative joint disease in 1 joint (1 dog), and unremarkable in 3 joints (2 dogs). The inflammation was categorized as suppurative (17 joints, 11 dogs) or pyogranulomatous (4 joints, 1 dog). Intra-articular Blastomyces organisms were observed in 10 joints (6 dogs). Eight of 9 joints (7 of 8 dogs) imaged had at least 1 radiographic abnormality, including 5 joints with osteolytic lesions. All bony lesions were periarticular. Ten dogs received oral antifungal drugs. Three dogs died within 1 month of evaluation; all 6 dogs with long-term follow-up achieved blastomycosis remission, but 2 required surgical arthrodesis of affected joints. Conclusions: Not all dogs with blastomycosis-associated arthritis have cytologically detectable organisms in their joint fluid. Clinical Relevance: Unlike other sampling sites where pyogranulomatous inflammation predominates, suppurative inflammation is most common in the 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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".