ArticleJFMS open reports
Rare occurrence of an intumescent cataract in a diabetic domestic longhair cat.
Article in JFMS open reports. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Case summary: A domestic longhair cat in Australia was referred to an ophthalmology service with the complaint of lens opacity. An incipient cataract was diagnosed in the right eye and an intumescent cataract with an equatorial lens capsule rupture in the left eye. The patient was being treated for diabetes mellitus, and previous concerns for the eyes had included conjunctivitis and left-sided periocular swelling and epiphora. Systemic work-up performed over the 7 months before ophthalmic referral included complete blood counts, biochemistry, serology (feline immunodeficiency virus, feline leukaemia virus, toxoplasmosis, cryptococcosis), thoracic radiographs, and ocular ultrasound and electroretinography performed before phacoemulsification. The patient did not have evidence of active uveitis at the initial ophthalmological examination, and historical serology excluded some common infectious causes of uveitis. The cataracts were treated successfully by phacoemulsification in both eyes, restoring vision. However, an intraocular lens was implanted only in the right eye, as the pre-existing lens capsule tear in the left eye precluded intraocular lens placement. Based on the medical history and clinical presentation, diabetes mellitus was suspected to be the cause of the cataracts. Relevance and novel information: Intumescent cataracts are reported in humans and dogs but have rarely been reported in domestic cats. Nonetheless, the intumescent cataract in this patient had similar characteristics to those in diabetic canine cataracts.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.