Volume: 53 Issue: 4
Year: 2022, Page: 558-564, Doi: https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.51966/jvas.2022.53.4.
Received: April 19, 2022 Accepted: June 17, 2022 Published: Dec. 31, 2022
Postpartum diseases of uterus represent a foremost predicament in cattle farms affecting reproductive efficiency. Postpartum (PP) uterine diseases include metritis, endometritis and subclinical endometritis (SCE). Barring SCE, all other diseases project the clinical signs. Diagnosis of SCE at the early stage of PP has been a challenging task for many veterinarians. The present study aimed to validate and correlate the proficiency of transitional changes in uterus and cervix assessed by transrectal ultrasonography (TRUS) and endometrial cytology (EC) in the diagnosis of SCE in PP cattle. The research was carried out in two phases i.e, 30th day postpartum (DPP) (n=74) and first exhibited oestrus after 45th DPP (n=24) (54.63 ± 1.13 d) to emphasise the proficiency of both the diagnostic modalities. Endometrial cytology could discriminate between cows positive and negative for SCE significantly at 30th DPP (20.54 ± 0.48 vs 5.55 ± 0.41). It was potent in diagnosing SCE after 45th DPP also, as a significant reduction in the per cent of PMN cells (20.54 ± 0.48 to 7.56 ± 0.32) was noticed. Uterine parameters assessed by TRUS like cervical and uterine diameter and endometrial thickness in both the phases of assessment did not correlate to the EC changes and also could not discriminate between SCE positive and negative animals. The results of the study signify that EC is efficacious in the diagnosis of SCE in cows, while TRUS is impractical as a sole diagnostic modality for SCE.
Keywords: Subclinical endometritis, endometrial cytology, transrectal ultrasonography
Arias, L.A.Q., Fernandez, M.V., Gonzalez, J.J.B., Lopez, M.B., Herradon, P.J.G. & Martinez, A.I.P. 2018. Subclinical endometritis in dairy cattle. Theriogenology. 5: 79-97.
Barlund, C.S., Carruthers, T.D., Waldner, C.L. & Palmer, C.W. 2008. A comparison of diagnostic techniques for postpartum endometritis in dairy cattle. Theriogenology. 69: 714-723.
Bonnett, B.N., Martin, S.W., Gannon, V.P., Miller, R.B. & Etherington, W.G. 1991. Endometrial biopsy in Holstein-Friesian dairy cows. III. Bacteriological analysis and correlations with histological findings. Can. J. Vet. Res. 55: 168-173.
Elmetwally, M.A. 2018. Uterine involution and ovarian activity in postpartum Holstein dairy cows. A review. J. Vet. Healthcare. 1: 29-40.
Gahlot, S.C., Kumar, S., Kumaresan, A., Chand, S., Baithalu, R.K., Lathika, S., Patbandha, T.K., Lathwal, S.S. & Mohanty, T.K. 2017. Efficiency of uterine fluid cytology in the diagnosis of subclinical endometritis in the water buffalo (Bubalus bubalis). Reprod. Dom. Anim. 52: 513-516.
Gayathri, P., Shibu, S., Kurien, M.O., Becha, B.B., Bunglavan, S.J., Niyas, E. & Gleeja, V.L. 2020. Comparison of endometrial cytology and transrectal ultrasonography for the diagnosis of subclinical endometritis. J. Vet. Anim. Sci. 51: 146-152.
Gilbert, R.O. & Schwark, D.S. 1992. Management of peripartum condition in the cow. Vet. Clin. N. Am. Food Anim. Pract. 8: 40-55.
Gilbert, R.O., Shin, S.T., Guard, C.L. & Erb, H.N. 1998. Incidence of endometritis and effects on reproductive performance of dairy cows. Theriogenology. 1: 251.
Kasimanickam, R., Duffield, T.F., Foster, R.A., Gartley, C.J., Leslie, K.E., Walton, J.S. & Johnson, W.H. 2004. Endometrial cytology and ultrasonography for the detection of subclinical endometritis in postpartum dairy cows. Theriogenology. 62: 9-23.
Kasimanickam, R., Duffield, T.F., Foster, R.A., Gartley, C.J., Leslie, K.E., Walton, J.S. & Johnson, W.H. 2005. The effect of a single administration of cephapirin or cloprostenol on the reproductive performance of dairy cows with subclinical endometritis. Theriogenology. 63: 818-830.
Madoz, L.V., Giuliodori, M.J., Jaureguiberry, M., Plontzke, J., Drillich, M. & de la Sota, R.L. 2013. The relationship between endometrial cytology during estrous cycle and cutoff points for the diagnosis of subclinical endometritis in grazing dairy cows. J. Dairy Sci. 96: 4333-4339.
Mateus, L., Lopes da Costa, L., Bernardo, F. & Robalo Silva, J. 2002. Influence of puerperal uterine infection on uterine involution and postpartum ovarian activity in dairy cows. Reprod. Dom. Anim. 37: 31-35.
Polat, B., Cengiz, M., Cannazik, O., Colak, A., Oruc, E., Altun, S., Salar, S. & Bastan, A. 2015. Endometrial echotexture variables in postpartum cows with subclinical endometritis. Anim. Reprod. Sci. 155: 50-55.
Purohit, G.N., Dholpuria, S., Yadav, S., Barolia, Y. & Kumar, P. 2013. Diagnosis and treatment of clinical and sub-clinical endometritis - A clinical study in 30 cows. Intas Polivet. 14: 31-33.
Robert, M.A., Shibu, S., Unnikrishnan, M.P., Kurien, M.O. & Anil, K.S. 2017. Efficacy of E. coli lipopolysaccharide in the treatment of subclinical endometritis in postpartum cows. J. Vet. Anim. Sci. 48: 90-92.
Sugiura, T., Akiyoshi, S., Inoue, F., Yanagawa, Y., Moriyoshi, M., Tajima, M. & Katagiri, S. 2018. Relationship between bovine endometrial thickness and plasma progesterone and estradiol concentrations in natural and induced estrus. J. Reprod. Dev. 64: 135-143.
Sheldon, I.M., Price, S.B., Cronin, J., Gilbert, R.O. & Gadsby, J.E. 2009. Mechanisms of infertility associated with clinical and subclinical endometritis in high producing dairy cattle. Reprod. Dom. Anim. 44: 1-9.
Sheldon, I.M., Owens, S.E. & Turner, M.L. 2017. Innate immunity and the sensing of infection, damage and danger in the female genital tract. J. Reprod. Immunol. 119: 67-73.
Copyright: © 2022 Nithish et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Nithish, H.N.N., Jayakumar, C., Shibu Simon, Abhilash, R.S. and Jith John Mathew. 2022. Endometrial cytology and transrectal ultrasonography in diagnosis of subclinical endometritis in postpartum crossbred cattle. J. Vet. Anim. Sci. 53(4): 558-564
DOI: https://doi.org/10.51966/jvas.2022.53.4.