Sad Day

Re: Sad Day

Richard Fox — Sun, 27 Nov 2011 14:05:01 GMT

OK - Sorry I am not trying to keep you guessing its just I might be on dodgy ground? If I tell you exactly then the answer is obvious. But its an easy and cheap and routine client side test and I would think most clinicians perform this test when confronted with the clinical signs. Anyhow its not that an uncommon disease which we get biopsies from and the test has not been performed

If your itching to know you can message me just don't want to make it obvious as the vet maybe a member of this forum.

Re: Sad Day

Robin Grimmer — Sun, 27 Nov 2011 11:32:40 GMT

[quote user="Richard Fox"]

I agree Laurence, nuts but not in this case - this, from what I gather, was one of those cases where £100's of pounds spent but failed to get a dx but a very simple test would and tx should have been done from the outset.

[/quote]

Can you tell us what that test was? ACTH stim by any chance

Re: Sad Day

Richard Fox — Sun, 27 Nov 2011 09:10:34 GMT

Re: Sad Day

Laurence Webb — Sat, 26 Nov 2011 22:41:58 GMT

I've noticed an odd phenonomen. Owners that agree/request investigation but then euthanase no matter what the diagnosis

Two recent examples were both hyperthyroid cats. Obviously there were many differentials for weight loss and polyphagia, some easy to treat some difficult. Both were diagnosed as hyperthyroid and the owners chose to euthanase. Of all the possible causes I'd view hyperthyroidism as one of the easiest to treat.

Now I don't doubt that the cats were both better off being euthanased rather than being left untreated, but why bother investigating in the first place? There's no point in investigating if it isn't going to change treatment options. In one case last week, whereI had suspected hyperthyroidism for several months, the owners finally agreed to a blood sample but then euthanased before the results came back. Why bother having the test done? Nuts.

I don't know any details of Richard's case, but it may have been one of those lumps that is removed but histology is declined because 'if it's out then it's fine, if is isn't I'm not going to do anything more' owners who later have a change of heart. I hope the vets didn't advise against sending samples away.

Re: Sad Day

Richard Fox — Thu, 24 Nov 2011 21:40:26 GMT

I expect so.

Re: Sad Day

Julian Earl — Thu, 24 Nov 2011 18:54:13 GMT

Perhaps the vet (and/or the owners) still wanted confirmation of a diagnosis?

Re: Sad Day

Richard Fox — Thu, 24 Nov 2011 16:54:30 GMT

We are human, well some of us Its just in this day and age these things shouldn't happen but they do (not that I am perfect I might add)!

Re: Sad Day

Rob Davis — Thu, 24 Nov 2011 16:50:14 GMT

I appreciate that you can't give any details, but it sounds odd that the biopsies were sent after the dog had been euthanased. Unfortunately I'm sure all of us in practice see this sort of thing all too often, and it is sometimes difficult not to get upset and annoyed with owners.

It's nice to know that pathologists are human though

Re: Sad Day

Richard Fox — Thu, 24 Nov 2011 16:49:24 GMT

Not sure what happened at the end TBH And I may have the wrong end of the stick (as we never have all the info) but that was how it read as I was also surprised I don't want to say more for obvious reasons.

Re: Sad Day

Dagmar Steele — Thu, 24 Nov 2011 16:47:44 GMT

Why on earth would one not wait for the results before performing euthanasia?

On the other hand now I'm really curious what kind of disease it was and a bit afraid I could be the one to make such a mistake someday....