evidencegap.vet
Editorial appraisals

Appraisals of the veterinary evidence base

Each appraisal is a close reading of a single study. It sets out what the paper claims, and asks whether the methods used can carry that claim.

3 published · 3 in preparationSigned editorial appraisalsRevised August 2026

Scope and method

Each appraisal states the claim under examination, sets out the design and the data as reported, then works through the specific features of the study that bear on whether the claim follows. Where a limitation is identified it is named by type, whether methodological, measurement, safety, practice or regulatory, so that the shape of the deficiency is legible rather than only its existence.

Appraisals are written from the published record, which comprises the primary report, its supplementary material, and, where the intervention is licensed, the regulatory summary. Where an analysis is unavailable, that absence is recorded rather than inferred around. Each appraisal carries a stable identifier, a revision date and a full declarations block.

Editorial status. These are signed editorial appraisals, not peer-reviewed articles. They are presented in journal format for legibility and citation, and each states its review status explicitly.

Contents

CommentaryEG-2026-006
August 2026

Pimobendan in preclinical stage B2 mitral valve disease: where the effect comes from, how fragile it is, and what the regulatory record shows

Canine cardiology

The EPIC survival curves were digitised and individual dogs reconstructed, reproducing the published medians, hazard ratio and P value. Nine reclassified dogs remove significance and the proportions alone are not significant, yet a 380-day median difference survives removing the first 23 weeks. Three non-identical versions of the trial sit on the public record, and full approval rests on a single-arm study whose success threshold was set below its own historical control rate.

Moderate certaintyEPIC 2016; FDA NADA 141-273, 2025
CommentaryEG-2026-005
August 2026

Steroids and heart failure in cats: science, or an old wives' tale?

Feline cardiology

Two papers published in 2004 and 2006 are cited repeatedly as the literature behind this belief, and neither of them supports it. Two studies that dosed cats deliberately found no cardiac change, steroid exposure was no more common in transient thickening than in true cardiomyopathy, and in people prednisone is used to increase diuresis in heart failure rather than withheld.

Low certaintySmith, 2004 to Poissonnier, 2025
Editorial appraisalEG-2026-004
August 2026

Rapamycin (sirolimus) for subclinical hypertrophic cardiomyopathy in cats: a critical appraisal of the evidence supporting conditional approval

Feline cardiology

Conditional approval of Felycin-CA1 rests on a single 43-cat trial that its own authors describe as nonpivotal, exploratory and dose-determining. The FDA record states that the endpoint was selected after exploratory analysis; the published paper presents it as prespecified and does not disclose the sequence.

Very low certaintyRAPACAT, 2023; FDA NADA 141-604, 2025
Editorial appraisalEG-2026-003
July 2026

Does preclinical pimobendan shorten survival once congestive heart failure develops?

Canine cardiology

Two retrospective cohorts report shorter post-CHF survival among dogs treated before the onset of failure. The signal warrants prospective study, but confounding by indication is a sufficient explanation on the present data.

Low certaintyTwo retrospective cohorts, 2025–26In preparation
Editorial appraisalEG-2026-002
June 2026

Torasemide as an alternative to furosemide in canine congestive heart failure

Canine cardiology

TEST supports torasemide as a reasonable alternative to furosemide. Non-inferiority demonstrated on a composite endpoint is, however, a materially weaker claim than the way the result is generally presented.

Low certaintyTEST, 2017In preparation
Editorial appraisalEG-2026-001
May 2026

Cannabidiol for osteoarthritis pain in dogs

Nutrition and supplements

Several small placebo-controlled trials point in different directions. The outcomes are owner-reported throughout, and caregiver placebo effects are large enough in this setting to account for much of the reported signal.

Low certaintyMultiple small RCTs, 2018–2025In preparation

Related

The gap map places these appraisals in context, mapping twenty-four clinical questions in small-animal cardiology against the strongest evidence available for each. The project runs specialty by specialty across small-animal practice, adding anaesthesia and analgesia, antimicrobials, nutrition and supplements, dermatology and oncology, and all of them are being built out and expanded.