Association of lung lesions measured by thoracic ultrasonography at first diagnosis of bronchopneumonia with relapse rate and growth performance in feedlot cattle
Open accessAbstract
Abstract Background Severity of lung lesions quantified by thoracic ultrasonography (TUS) at time of bronchopneumonia (BP) diagnosis predicted death among steers not treated for this condition. Further research is needed to confirm that lung lesions detected by TUS can be associated with negative outcomes in cattle with BP that subsequently were treated. Objective To quantify the effects on relapse rate and average daily gain (ADG) of lung lesions detected by TUS at first BP diagnosis in feedlot cattle. Animals Prospective cohort of mixed beef-breed steers (n = 93; 243 ± 36 kg) and heifers (n = 51; 227 ± 42 kg) with BP at 4 feedlots. Methods Thoracic ultrasonography was performed by the same clinician and 16-second TUS videos were evaluated offline for maximal depth and area of lung consolidation, maximum number of comet tails, and maximal depth of pleural fluid. Individual ADG was calculated between 1 and 120 days after arrival. Effects of lesions on relapse rate and ADG were investigated using mixed regression models. Results Maximal depth of lung consolidation was associated with a higher risk of relapse (odds ratio [OR], 1.337/cm; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.042-1.714) and lower ADG (− 34 g/cm; −64 to −4). Maximal area of lung consolidation also was associated with a higher relapse risk (OR, 1.052/cm2; 1.009-1.097) but not with ADG. Comet tails and pleural fluid were not associated with risk of relapse or ADG. Conclusions and Clinical Importance Quantifying maximal depth and area of lung consolidation by TUS at first BP diagnosis can provide useful prognostic information in feedlot cattle.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
TUS is limited by its inability to image the lung parenchyma above the heart in large beef calves due to their substantial size and muscle mass.
“Nevertheless, the technique is limited by its inability to image the lung parenchyma above the heart in large beef calves due to their substantial size and muscle mass.”
From Strategies for Bovine Respiratory Disease (BRD) Diagnosis and Prognosis: A Comprehensive Overview (2024) · cites this paper as [150]
The Materials and Methods section (Thoracic ultrasonography; page unavailable) says the first through third intercostal spaces could not be scanned in animals of this size, particularly when restrained in a chute. This supports a size-related scanning limitation, but the paper does not identify lung parenchyma above the heart as the inaccessible area or attribute the limitation to muscle mass. (LLM, conf=0.86)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredDistinguishing between active, treatable lung lesions and those resulting from prior, treatment-resistant conditions remains a significant challenge.
“Distinguishing between active, treatable lung lesions and those resulting from prior, treatment-resistant conditions remains a significant challenge [30,148,149,150].”
From Strategies for Bovine Respiratory Disease (BRD) Diagnosis and Prognosis: A Comprehensive Overview (2024) · cites this paper as [150]
The Introduction says that diagnosing bronchopneumonia in feedlot cattle is challenging, and the Discussion relates ultrasound-measured lesions to relapse and growth. Neither section addresses the claimed difficulty of distinguishing active, treatable lesions from lesions due to prior, treatment-resistant conditions. Searches for active, chronic, prior, and treatment-resistant lesions found no passage making that distinction. (LLM, conf=0.75)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
On-Farm Use of Ultrasonography for Bovine Respiratory Disease
Ollivett, T. L., & Buczinski, S. (2016) · Veterinary Clinics of North America: Food Animal Practice · doi:10.1016/j.cvfa.2015.09.001 · Cited by 177 · see citing works
Self-citationTimsit, E., Dendukuri, N., Schiller, I., & Buczinski, S. (2016) · Preventive Veterinary Medicine · doi:10.1016/j.prevetmed.2016.11.006 · Cited by 112 · see citing works
Self-citationTheurer, M. E., White, B. J., Larson, R. L., Holstein, K. K., & Amrine, D. E. (2014) · Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association · doi:10.2460/javma.245.11.1279 · Cited by 24 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 9
- [1]Wolfger B, Timsit E, White BJ, Orsel K. A systematic review of bovine respiratory disease diagnosis focused on diagnostic confirmation, early detection, and prediction of unfavorable outcomes in feedlot cattle. Vet Clin North Am Food Anim Pract. 2015; 31: 351‐ 365. 26210764
- [4]Buczinski S, Menard J, Timsit E. Incremental value (bayesian framework) of thoracic ultrasonography over thoracic auscultation for diagnosis of bronchopneumonia in preweaned dairy calves. J Vet Intern Med. 2016; 30: 1396‐ 1401. 27305277 PMC5094515
- [5]Rademacher RD, Buczinski S, Tripp HM, et al. Systematic thoracic ultrasonography in acute bovine respiratory disease of feedlot steers: impact of lung consolidation on diagnosis and prognosis in a case‐control study. Bovine Pract. 2014; 48: 1‐ 10.
- [6]Buczinski S, Buathier C, Belanger AM, et al. Inter‐rater agreement and reliability of thoracic ultrasonographic findings in feedlot calves, with or without naturally occurring bronchopneumonia. J Vet Intern Med. 2018; 32: 1787‐ 1792. 30133838 PMC6189347
- [7]Ollivett TL, Caswell JL, Nydam DV, et al. Thoracic ultrasonography and bronchoalveolar lavage fluid analysis in Holstein calves with subclinical lung lesions. J Vet Intern Med. 2015; 29: 1728‐ 1734. 26332345 PMC4895683
- [8]Timsit E, Leguillette R, White BJ, et al. Likelihood ratios: an intuitive tool to incorporate diagnostic test results into decision making. J Am Vet Med Assoc. 2018; 252: 1362‐ 1366. 29772968
- [10]Abutarbush SM, Pollock CM, Wildman BK, et al. Evaluation of the diagnostic and prognostic utility of ultrasonography at first diagnosis of presumptive bovine respiratory disease. Can J Vet Res. 2012; 76: 23‐ 32. 22754091 PMC3244284
- [11]Rosen MP, Mehta TS, Bromberg R, et al. Remote sonographic interpretation using a laser printer network: system performance and diagnostic accuracy in actual clinical practice. Am J Radiol. 2001; 176: 855‐ 860. 11264064
- [12]Buczinski S, Forte G, Francoz D, et al. Comparison of thoracic auscultation, clinical score, and ultrasonography as indicators of bovine respiratory disease in preweaned dairy calves. J Vet Intern Med. 2014; 28: 234‐ 242. 24236441 PMC4895545
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Bovine Respiratory Disease Diagnosis
Buczinski, S., & Pardon, B. (2020) · Veterinary Clinics of North America: Food Animal Practice · doi:10.1016/j.cvfa.2020.03.004 · Cited by 89 · see citing works
Self-citationStrategies for Bovine Respiratory Disease (BRD) Diagnosis and Prognosis: A Comprehensive Overview
Kamel, M. S., Davidson, J. L., & Verma, M. S. (2024) · Animals · doi:10.3390/ani14040627 · Cited by 76 · see citing works
“…by its inability to image the lung parenchyma above the heart in large beef calves due to their substantial size and muscle mass. Distinguishing between active, treatable lung lesions and those resulting from prior, treatment-resistant conditions remains a significant challenge [30,148–150].”
BackgroundPredictive Modeling of Bovine Respiratory Disease Outcomes in Feedlot Cattle: A Narrative Review
Wisnieski, L., Amrine, D. E., & Renter, D. G. (2021) · Livestock Science · doi:10.1016/j.livsci.2021.104666 · Cited by 23 · see citing works
- Authors
- Timsit, E., Tison, N., Booker, C. W., & Buczinski, S.
- Affiliations
- University of Calgary (CA)
- Université de Montréal (CA)
- Feedlot Health Management Services , Okotoks, Alberta,
- Corresponding author
- Timsit, Edouard
- Buczinski, Sébastien
- Venue
- Journal of Veterinary Internal Medicine
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2019-05-01
- Volume
- 33
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 1540-1546
- ISSN
- 0891-6640 (ISSN-L)
- 1939-1676
- PMC
- PMC6524390
- OpenAlex
- W2944839766
- Cited by
- 33
- References
- 3
- Citations by year
- 2026: 6 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 5
- FWCI
- 1.84
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Journal of Veterinary Internal Medicine (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
- Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
- Funders
- University of Calgary, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine (10004657)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Immunology and Microbiology › Microbiology › Microbial infections and disease research
- Health Sciences › Veterinary › Small Animals › Animal health and immunology
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Critical Care and Intensive Care Medicine › Ultrasound in Clinical Applications
- Keywords
- bronchopneumonia, feedlot cattle, thoracic ultrasound, lung consolidation, lung lesions, relapse rate, average daily gain, growth performance, pleural fluid, cometary tails, steers, heifers, prognostic factors
- MeSH terms
- Animals, Bronchopneumonia, Cattle, Cattle Diseases, Female, Lung, Male, Prospective Studies, Recurrence, Ultrasonography, Cohort Studies
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
