The effect of arthroscopic lavage volume on bacterial culture of egress fluid in horses with experimentally induced septic arthritis and synovitis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate if high-volume lavage results in a negative bacterial culture of egress fluid, regardless of pathogen in an experimental model of equine septic arthritis. STUDY DESIGN: Experimental study. ANIMALS: A total of 11 horses in three groups (lipopolysaccharide [LPS] Group 1, n = 4; Escherichia coli [E. coli] Group 2, n = 4; Staphylococcus aureus [S. aureus] Group 3, n = 3). METHODS: A middle carpal joint of each horse was injected with LPS (synovitis Group 1), E. coli (septic arthritis Group 2) or S. aureus (septic arthritis Group 3). Arthroscopic lavage of the middle carpal joint was performed 24-h post-injection. Egress fluid samples were collected every liter for bacterial culture. Liter samples 1, 5, 10, 15, and 20 were submitted for bacterial culture. Subsequent samples were submitted based on the results of the initial dataset. RESULTS: Predicted probability of a positive culture after 1, 5, 10, 15, and 20 L for E. coli and S. aureus, respectively were: 44.7% (p = .04) and 98.3% (p ≤ .001) after 1 L, 42.6% (p = .02) and 94.3% (p ≤ .001) after 5 L, 40.1% (p = .02) and 77.8% (p = .001) after 10 L, 37.6% (p = .04) and 42.5% (p = .08) after 15 L, and 35.2% (p = .09) and 13.5% (p = .32) after 20 L. LPS cultures (n = 4) were negative at every timepoint. Post-lavage 50% (2/4) of E coli. and 100% (3/3) S. aureus horses had positive synovial fluid cultures. CONCLUSION: A total of 20 L of lavage fluid was not sufficient to result in a sustained negative bacterial culture. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: High-volume arthroscopic lavage alone is not sufficient as a treatment for septic arthritis.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".