Longitudinal cohort study reveals improved respiratory outcomes after surgery for brachycephalic obstructive airway syndrome, indicating durable benefits.
Objectives To report and compare short‐ and long‐term outcomes in dogs following surgery for brachycephalic obstructive airway syndrome (BOAS). Study design Longitudinal cohort study. Sample population Client owned dogs ( n = 32). Methods Dogs that underwent BOAS surgery before 2019 with preoperative and short‐term postoperative assessments were recruited for long‐term follow up to obtain respiratory functional grades (RFG) and BOAS indices. Dogs that underwent a second airway surgery (33 of 117) were excluded. Comparisons of BOAS indices and RFGs among preoperative, short‐term, and long‐term postoperative time points were performed using Friedman's tests and post hoc Wilcoxon signed rank tests with Bonferroni corrections. Results There were 32 of 117 dogs available for long‐term assessment. Median long‐term postoperative assessments occurred at 1645 days after surgery (range 1208–2927 days). Long‐term postoperative RFG and BOAS index values were improved compared with preoperative values. There was no difference between short‐term and long‐term postoperative assessments ( p > .999 for RFG values, and p = .623 for BOAS index values). Owners reported a high degree of satisfaction with surgery: 55% believed their dogs no longer had breathing problems (long‐term BOAS index 50.8 ± 17.6%) and 39% believed their dog still had breathing problems (long‐term BOAS index 48.9 ± 20.5%). Conclusion Improvements in RFG and BOAS Indices seen following surgery were maintained over time. Clinical significance This is the first study with clinician‐assessed objective long‐term respiratory outcomes of BOAS surgery. The long‐term improvements in RFG and BOAS indices support the long‐term clinical benefit and durability of surgical intervention for BOAS.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Johnson et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: