Hi Christie,
I hope your Mom’s dog is feeling better.
When I read this statement it struck me as interesting. “This vet said that the dog should have been put on antibiotics for two weeks instead of one week than the other vet prescribed. He also said that the other vet should have given the prescription food at the same time as the antibiotics to help dissolve the struvite crystals, while the antibiotics worked against the infection. So that was strike two.”
I’m interpreting it as as two strikes against the first vet and I found that interesting. Was the first vet incorrect in the assessment of your dog’s condition? Was the second vet incorrect? Or were both correct or neither correct? Those are the options.
It seems one concern was over duration of treatment. Is there a right answer or is it an unknown? Way back when in the late 80’s early 90’s when my dog had UTI the standard treatment duration was 3 weeks of antibiotics. Now most consider that overkill and that that type of duration only damages the gut microflora. A newer protocol for E coli calls for only 3 days of treatment. So the “standard” is changing and shifting to shorter courses is more common, sometimes only 3-5 days are being used and 1 week is considered overkill LOL So I don’t see it as a strike against vet 1 for scripting a 7 day course.
Crystals: Are they a problem and is a special diet needed? The significance of crystals depends on the type. Since you mentioned s/d I’m going to assume they were struvite crystals. Struvite crystals are common… so common that they can be considered normal in dogs and rarely in need of any treatment. Did/do they in this situation need to be addressed with a special diet? Hmm personally I’d lean to saying no… So for me I really don’t see a big issue with the food not having been given concurrent with the meds and wouldn’t call “strike two” on vet one.
