Tierarztliche Praxis. Ausgabe K, Kleintiere/Heimtiere · 2024
[Flushing the canine prepuce before mating, useful or not?].
Аннотация на английскомСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Kühn Katharina, Meyer-Lindenberg Andrea, Reese Sven, Wolf Georg, Walter Beate, Leykam Christian, Flock Ulrike, Otzdorff Christiane
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: Various facultative pathogenic bacteria have been detected in the dog's prepuce. To prevent the transmission of these bacteria, some breeders flush the prepuce of their stud dogs before mating. The purpose of this study is to find out whether preputial flushing is medically useful before mating.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: 20 male dogs participated in the study. Their prepuce was flushed with physiological saline and minimum 4 weeks later with Caniprevent. The effect of the different solutions was compared using microbiological examinations of swab samples taken before and after flushing.
RESULTS: The most frequently identified bacterial species were Escherichia coli, Staphylococcus pseudintermedius, Streptococcus canis and mycoplasma. There was no significant difference in the number of bacteria detected in dogs with and without preputial discharge (p=0.878). After the flushing there was a significant decrease in bacterial growth. The bacterial reduction after preputial flushing with Caniprevent was 20.8% (p<0.001) and in that more pronounced than after flushing with NaCl (p=0.004).
CONCLUSION: Although a reduction in bacteria through preputial flushing could be detected in this study, the medical benefits of prophylactic flushing cannot yet be assessed.
CLINICAL RELEVANCE: With regard to preputial discharge and preputial flushing solutions, further research is needed in order to be able to better inform and advice pet owners.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: 20 male dogs participated in the study. Their prepuce was flushed with physiological saline and minimum 4 weeks later with Caniprevent. The effect of the different solutions was compared using microbiological examinations of swab samples taken before and after flushing.
RESULTS: The most frequently identified bacterial species were Escherichia coli, Staphylococcus pseudintermedius, Streptococcus canis and mycoplasma. There was no significant difference in the number of bacteria detected in dogs with and without preputial discharge (p=0.878). After the flushing there was a significant decrease in bacterial growth. The bacterial reduction after preputial flushing with Caniprevent was 20.8% (p<0.001) and in that more pronounced than after flushing with NaCl (p=0.004).
CONCLUSION: Although a reduction in bacteria through preputial flushing could be detected in this study, the medical benefits of prophylactic flushing cannot yet be assessed.
CLINICAL RELEVANCE: With regard to preputial discharge and preputial flushing solutions, further research is needed in order to be able to better inform and advice pet owners.