| Literature DB >> 28763490 |
Nai-Chieh Liu1, Eileen L Troconis1, Lajos Kalmar1, David J Price1, Hattie E Wright1, Vicki J Adams2, David R Sargan1, Jane F Ladlow1.
Abstract
Extremely brachycephalic, or short-muzzled, dog breeds such as pugs, French bulldogs, and bulldogs are prone to the conformation-related respiratory disorder-brachycephalic obstructive airway syndrome (BOAS). Affected dogs present with a wide range of clinical signs from snoring and exercise intolerance, to life-threatening events such as syncope. In this study, conformational risk factors for BOAS that could potentially aid in breeding away from BOAS were sought. Six hundred and four pugs, French bulldogs, and bulldogs were included in the study. Soft tape measurements of the head and body were used and the inter-observer reproducibility was evaluated. Breed-specific models were developed to assess the associations between the conformational factors and BOAS status based on functional grading. The models were further validated by means of a BOAS index, which is an objective measurement of respiratory function using whole-body barometric plethysmography. The final models have good predictive power for discriminating BOAS (-) and BOAS (+) phenotypes indicated by the area under the curve values of >80% on the receiver operating curves. When other factors were controlled, stenotic nostrils were associated with BOAS in all three breeds; pugs and bulldogs with higher body condition scores (BCS) had a higher risk of developing BOAS. Among the standardized conformational measurements (i.e. craniofacial ratio (CFR), eye width ratio (EWR), skull index (SI), neck girth ratio (NGR), and neck length ratio (NLR)), for pugs EWR and SI, for French bulldogs NGR and NLR, and for bulldogs SI and NGR showed significant associations with BOAS status. However, the NGR in bulldogs was the only significant predictor that also had satisfactory inter-observer reproducibility. A NGR higher than 0.71 in male bulldogs was predictive of BOAS with approximately 70% sensitivity and specificity. In conclusion, stenotic nostrils, BCS, and NGR were found to be valid, easily applicable predictors for BOAS (+).Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28763490 PMCID: PMC5538678 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0181928
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Fig 1Examples of different degrees of nostril stenosis in pugs, French bulldogs, and bulldogs.
The following descriptions were adapted from a previously published figure by the authors (Fig 1 in Liu et al. 2016): “Open nostrils: nostrils are wide open; mildly stenotic nostrils: slightly narrowed nostrils where the lateral nostril wall does not touch the medial nostril wall. Immediately after the exercise tolerance test (ETT), the nostril wings should move dorsolaterally to open on inspiration; moderately stenotic nostrils: the lateral nostril wall touches the medial nostril wall at the dorsal part of the nostrils and the nostrils are only open at the bottom. Immediately after the ETT, the nostril wings are not able to move dorsolaterally and there may be nasal flaring (ie, muscle contraction around the nose trying to enlarge the nostrils; severely stenotic nostrils: nostrils are almost closed. The dog may switch to oral breathing from nasal breathing with stress or very gentle exercise such as playing.” (Liu et al. 2016).
Descriptions of the soft tape measurements.
| Descriptions | |
|---|---|
| The distance along the surface of the head at the skull midline from the external occipital protuberance to the point between the medial canthus of the left eye and the medial canthus of the right eye. | |
| The distance along the surface of the head at the skull midline from the stop to the rostral end of the nasal planum. | |
| The distance along the surface of the head at the skull midline from the external occipital protuberance to the rostral end of the nasal planum. | |
| The linear distance (widest distance) between the left external zygomatic arch and the right external zygomatic arch. | |
| The linear distance between the medial canthus of the left eye and the medial canthus of the right eye. | |
| The distance along the dorsal body midline from the external occipital protuberance to the point between the cranial angle of the left scapula and the cranial angle of the right scapula. | |
| The circumference of the neck at the median distance between the external occipital protuberance and the point between the cranial angle of the left scapula and the cranial angle of the right scapula. | |
| The circumference of the deepest part of the thoracic cavity. | |
| The distance along the dorsal body midline from the the point between the cranial angle of the left scapula and the cranial angle of the right scapula to the root of the tail. |
* Skull length measurement in this study was the sum of CL measurement and SnL measurement
Fig 2Demonstration of the soft tape measurements.
Nine measurements were made with a firmly held soft tape measure with the dog standing and at rest: Skull length (SL), cranial length (CL), snout length (SnL), neck length (NL), body length (BL), eye width (EW), and skull width (SW). The detailed definitions of the measurements are shown in Table 1. The photos of the dogs were taken from two of the study dogs by the authors.
Signalment and the proportions of the subjects with stenotic nostrils and different functional grades.
| Pug | French bulldog | Bulldog | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 189 | 214 | 201 | |
| Clinical: 14.8% | Clinical: 17.3% | Clinical: 4.5% | |
| Volunteered: 85.2% | Volunteered: 82.7% | Volunteered: 95.5% | |
| 36 (12–147) | 28 (12–126) | 26 (12–178) | |
| Male: 40.7% | Male: 44.4% | Male: 43.8% | |
| Female: 59.3% | Females: 55.6% | Female: 56.2% | |
| Intact: 64.6% | Intact: 68.7% | Intact: 91.5% | |
| Neutered: 35.4% | Neutered: 31.3% | Neutered: 8.5% | |
| 8.53 ± 1.47 | 12.12 ± 2.05 | 25.47 ± 3.11 | |
| 7 (4–9); 60.8% | 5 (3–9); 8.4% | 6 (4–8); 35.3% | |
| Open: 9.5% | Open: 10.8% | Open: 26.9% | |
| Mild: 21.2% | Mild: 13.6% | Mild: 28.4% | |
| Moderate: 38.1% | Moderate: 29.0% | Moderate: 34.3% | |
| Severe: 19.6% | Severe: 45.33% | Severe: 9.5% | |
| NA: 11.6% | NA: 1.4% | NA: 1.0% | |
| Grade 0: 4.8% | Grade 0: 10.7% | Grade 0: 10.9% | |
| Grade I: 30.7% | Grade I: 30.4% | Grade I: 37.8% | |
| Grade II: 44.9% | Grade II: 43.5% | Grade II: 38.8% | |
| Grade III: 19.6% | Grade III: 15.4% | Grade III: 12.4% |
SD, standard deviation; BCS, body condition score; BOAS, brachycephalic obstructive airway syndrome; NA, data not available.
* Obesity was defined as BCS ≥ 7 on a 9-point scale.
Fig 3Scatter plots show the inter-observer reproducibility of the conformational soft tape measures.
The diagonal red line indicates perfect agreement. ICC, intra-class correlation coefficient; CFR, craniofacial ratio; EWR, eye width ratio; SI, skull index; NGR, neck girth ratio; NLR, neck length ratio.
The breed-specific models predicting the probability of having brachycephalic obstructive airway syndrome (BOAS).
| B (SE) | z value | Odd ratio (95%CI) | p value | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| (Intercept) | -12.959 (3.749) | - | - | - |
| Gender | -1.676 (0.468) | -3.584 | 0.187 (0.072 to 0.454) | <0.001 |
| BCS | 0.363 (0.196) | 1.849 | 1.437 (0.983 to 2.131) | 0.064 |
| Stenotic nostrils | 1.521 (0.405) | 3.759 | 4.579 (2.110 to 10.396) | <0.001 |
| Body weight (kg) | 0.460 (0.176) | 2.611 | 1.584 (1.135 to 2.272) | 0.009 |
| EWR | 0.081 (0.038) | 2.147 | 1.084 (1.009 to 1.171) | 0.032 |
| SI | 0.068 (0.021) | 3.238 | 1.070 (1.028 to 1.117) | 0.001 |
| NLR | -0.070 (0.037) | -1.869 | 0.933 (0.866 to 1.003) | 0.062 |
| (Intercept) | -7.563 (2.70) | - | - | - |
| Age (month) | 0.011 (0.007) | 1.547 | 1.011 (0.997 to 1.026) | 0.122 |
| Gender | 0.757 (0.340) | 2.227 | 2.132 (1.102 to 4.198) | 0.026 |
| BCS | 0.256 (0.177) | 1.447 | 1.292 (0.919 to 1.846) | 0.148 |
| Stenotic nostrils | 1.731 (0.397) | 4.360 | 5.645 (2.649 to 12.676) | <0.0001 |
| CFR | -0.065 (0.046) | -1.429 | 0.937 (0.855 to 1.023) | 0.153 |
| NGR | 0.115 (0.035) | 3.265 | 1.122 (1.049 to 1.206) | 0.001 |
| NLR | -0.071 (0.029) | -2.431 | 0.932 (0.879 to 0.986) | 0.015 |
| (Intercept) | -24.119 (4.224) | - | - | - |
| Gender | 0.120 (0.386) | 0.311 | 1.127 (0.524 to 2.390) | 0.756 |
| Neuter status | 2.091 (0.727) | 2.876 | 8.093 (2.142 to 38.94) | 0.004 |
| BCS | 0.441 (0.193) | 2.287 | 1.555 (1.073 to 2.295) | 0.022 |
| Stenotic nostrils | 0.463 (0.344) | 1.349 | 1.590 (0.811 to 3.132) | 0.177 |
| SI | 0.045 (0.019) | 2.403 | 1.046 (1.009 to 1.086) | 0.016 |
| NGR | 0.255 (0.050) | 5.075 | 1.290 (1.175 to 1.431) | <0.0001 |
Multivariate logistic regression was used with BOAS (+) and BOAS (-) as the binary outcome variable.
B, regression coefficient; SE, standard error; CI, confidence interval; BCS, body condition score; EWR, eye width ratio = eye width /skull width; SI, skull index = skull width / skull length; NLR, neck length ratio = neck length / body length; CFR, craniofacial ratio = snout length / cranial length; NGR, neck girth ratio = neck girth / chest girth.
When including the ratios (EWR, SI, NLR, CFR, NGR), in the above models, the values were converted from a proportion/ratio to a percentage (i.e., the ratio times 100) so that the coefficients were easier to read.
The binary outcome variable used in the multivariate logistic regression was based on BOAS functional grades: 0 = function grade 0/I; 1 = functional grade II/III
For the binary variable the coding was defined as follows:
Gender (0 = female; 1 = male)
Stenotic nostrils (0 = open or mildly stenotic nostrils; 1 = moderately or severely stenotic nostrils)
Neuter status (0 = intact; 1 = neutered)
* The significance level was set at p<0.05;
** p<0.01,
*** p<0.001.
Fig 4Stacked bar charts demonstrate the relationship between BOAS functional grade and body condition score (BCS), and the degree of nostril stenosis.
The y-axis shows the percentage of dogs of that functional grade showing each degree of BCS or nostril stenosis. Note the clear trends of an increased proportion of obese dogs and dogs with moderately or severely stenotic nostrils with an increase in functional grade. In French bulldogs, there were over 10% of Grade III dogs that had BCS of 3. The underweight condition was attributed to BOAS-related frequent regurgitation.
Fig 5Univariate logistic regression plots demonstrate the trend of the five conformational ratios against the estimated BOAS probability.
The x-axis is the numeric data of each ratio in percentage; the y-axis is the estimated probability of BOAS. CFR, craniofacial ratio; EWR, eye width ratio; SI, skull index; NGR, neck girth ratio; NLR, neck length ratio.
Fig 6The predictive performance of the breed specific models.
(A) boxplots show the distributions of the estimated probability of being BOAS-affected. The dotted line at 50% of the probability represents the raw predictive cut-off. For pugs and French bulldogs, the cut-off values can be adjusted to improve the specificity of the models; (B) receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves show the predictive performance of the breed specific models. Area under the curve (AUC) was computed with its 95% confidence interval in the bracket.
Validation of the predictive models using BOAS index.
| B (SE) | 95%CI | t value | p value | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| (Intercept) | -27.968 (37.925) | - | - | - |
| Gender | -11.128 (5.046) | -21.137 to -1.119 | -2.205 | 0.030 |
| BCS | 6.417 (2.203) | 2.047 to 10.786 | 2.913 | 0.004 |
| Stenotic nostrils | 12.921 (4.681) | 3.637 to 22.205 | 2.760 | 0.007 |
| Body weight (kg) | 1.717 (1.867) | -1.987 to 5.421 | 0.919 | 0.360 |
| EWR | 0.249 (0.423) | -0.591 to 1.088 | 0.588 | 0.558 |
| SI | 0.442 (0.217) | 0.011 to 0.873 | 2.035 | 0.044 |
| NLR | -0.623 (0.411) | -1.437 to 0.192 | -1.517 | 0.132 |
| (Intercept) | -37.271 (39.269) | - | - | - |
| Age (month) | 0.071 (0.10) | -0.128 to 0.271 | 0.710 | 0.479 |
| Gender | -5.460 (5.395) | -16.175 to 5.255 | -1.012 | 0.314 |
| BCS | 0.524 (2.650) | -4.740 to 5.788 | 0.198 | 0.844 |
| Stenotic nostrils | 16.490 (5.775) | 5.020 to 27.960 | 2.855 | 0.005 |
| CFR | -0.633 (0.666) | -1.955 to 0.690 | -0.950 | 0.345 |
| NGR | 1.674 (0.530) | 0.622 to 2.726 | 3.160 | 0.002 |
| NLR | -0.848 (0.433) | -1.707 to 0.012 | -1.959 | 0.053 |
| (Intercept) | -180.142 (53.314) | - | - | - |
| Gender | -4.725 (6.765) | -18.211 to 8.760 | -0.699 | 0.487 |
| Neuter status | 23.737 (11.561) | 0.690 to 46.784 | 2.053 | 0.044 |
| BCS | 4.427 (2.849) | -1.251 to 10.105 | 1.554 | 0.125 |
| Stenotic nostrils | 16.457 (5.423) | 5.646 to 27.267 | 3.034 | 0.003 |
| SI | 0.402 (0.260) | -0.115 to 0.919 | 1.549 | 0.126 |
| NGR | 2.339 (0.698) | 0.948 to 3.731 | 3.351 | 0.001 |
Multivariate regression was used with BOAS index as the outcome variable.
To validate the predictive models (Table 3) that the outcome variable was based on a subjective clinical assessment (functional grading system), the objective respiratory function severity score, BOAS index (a numeric score computed from flow waveforms obtained from whole-body barometric plethysmography), was further used on a smaller study population (pug = 115; FB = 100; bulldog = 79). Variables that were included in the predictive models in Table 3 were input into the multivariate regression models.
BOAS, brachycephalic obstructive airway syndrome; B, regression coefficient; SE, standard error; CI, confidence interval; BCS, body condition score; EWR, eye width ratio = eye width/ skull width; SI, skull index = skull width / skull length; NLR, neck length ratio = neck length / body length; CFR, craniofacial ratio; NGR, neck girth ratio = neck girth / chest girth;
When including the ratios (EWR, SI, NLR, CFR, NGR), in the above models, the values were converted from a proportion/ratio to a percentage (i.e., the ratio times 100) so that the coefficients were easier to read.
For the binary variable the coding was defined as follows:
Gender (0 = female; 1 = male)
Stenotic nostrils (0 = open or mildly stenotic nostrils; 1 = moderately or severely stenotic nostrils)
Neuter status (0 = intact; 1 = neutered)
* The significance level was set at p<0.05
** p<0.01
Fig 7An illustration demonstrates the relationship between the external craniofacial ratio (CFR) measurement and the corresponding internal anatomical structures of the upper airway.
The realistic anatomical illustration was made according to a computed tomographic 3-dimensional rendering image of a French bulldog. The illustration was reprinted from the Cambridge BOAS research group website (http://www.vet.cam.ac.uk/boas) under a CC BY license, with permission from the group in the University of Cambridge, original copyright 2016.