Cover American Journal of Veterinary Research
American Journal of Veterinary Research
ISSN:
0002-9645
Publication Date:
01 Feb 2019

  • 1. Marks AL, Hecht S, Stokes JE, et al. Effects of gadoxetate disodium (Eovist) contrast on magnetic resonance imaging characteristics of the liver in clinically healthy dogs. Vet Radiol Ultrasound 2014;55:286–291.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • 2. Feeney DA, Anderson KL, Ziegler LE, et al. Statistical relevance of ultrasonographic criteria in the assessment of diffuse liver disease in dogs and cats. Am J Vet Res 2008;69:212–221.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • 3. Marino CL, Lascelles BD, Vaden SL, et al. Prevalence and classification of chronic kidney disease in cats randomly selected from four age groups and in cats recruited for degenerative joint disease studies. J Feline Med Surg 2014;16:465–472.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • 4. Bragato N, Borges NC, Fioravanti MCS. B-mode and Doppler ultrasound of chronic kidney disease in dogs and cats. Vet Res Commun 2017;41:307–315.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • 5. Newell SM, Graham JP, Roberts GD, et al. Quantitative magnetic resonance imaging of the normal feline cranial abdomen. Vet Radiol Ultrasound 2000;41:27–34.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • 6. Marolf AJ, Kraft SL, Dunphy TR, et al. Magnetic resonance (MR) imaging and MR cholangiopancreatography findings in cats with cholangitis and pancreatitis. J Feline Med Surg 2013;15:285–294.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • 7. Taouli B, Ehman RL, Reeder SB. Advanced MRI methods for assessment of chronic liver disease. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2009;193:14–27.

  • 8. Cox EF, Buchanan CE, Bradley CR, et al. Multiparametric renal magnetic resonance imaging: validation, interventions, and alterations in chronic kidney disease. Front Physiol 2017;8:696.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • 9. Sigmund EE, Vivier PH, Sui D, et al. Intravoxel incoherent motion and diffusion-tensor imaging in renal tissue under hydration and furosemide flow challenges. Radiology 2012;263:758–769.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • 10. Hagiwara M, Rusinek H, Lee VS, et al. Advanced liver fibrosis: diagnosis with 3D whole-liver perfusion MR imaging—initial experience. Radiology 2008;246:926–934.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • 11. Martin DR, Seibert D, Yang M, et al. Reversible heterogeneous arterial phase liver perfusion associated with transient acute hepatitis: findings on gadolinium-enhanced MRI. J Magn Reson Imaging 2004;20:838–842.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • 12. Tsushima Y, Blomley MJ, Yokoyama H, et al. Does the presence of distant and local malignancy alter parenchymal perfusion in apparently disease-free areas of the liver? Dig Dis Sci 2001;46:2113–2119.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • 13. Notohamiprodjo M, Reiser MF, Sourbron SP. Diffusion and perfusion of the kidney. Eur J Radiol 2010;76:337–347.

  • 14. Del Chicca F, Schwarz A, Grest P, et al. Perfusion- and diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging of the liver of healthy dogs. Am J Vet Res 2016;77:463–470.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • 15. Qayyum A. Diffusion-weighted imaging in the abdomen and pelvis: concepts and applications. Radiographics 2009;29:1797–1810.

  • 16. Lewin M, Poujol-Robert A, Boelle PY, et al. Diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging for the assessment of fibrosis in chronic hepatitis C. Hepatology 2007;46:658–665.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • 17. Demir OI, Obuz F, Sagol O, et al. Contribution of diffusion-weighted MRI to the differential diagnosis of hepatic masses. Diagn Interv Radiol 2007;13:81–86.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • 18. Namimoto T, Yamashita Y, Mitsuzaki K, et al. Measurement of the apparent diffusion coefficient in diffuse renal disease by diffusion-weighted echo-planar MR imaging. J Magn Reson Imaging 1999;9:832–837.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • 19. Fukuda Y, Ohashi I, Hanafusa K, et al. Anisotropic diffusion in kidney: apparent diffusion coefficient measurements for clinical use. J Magn Reson Imaging 2000;11:156–160.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • 20. Li Q, Li J, Zhang L, et al. Diffusion-weighted imaging in assessing renal pathology of chronic kidney disease: a preliminary clinical study. Eur J Radiol 2014;83:756–762.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • 21. Sutherland-Smith J, King R, Faissler D, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging apparent diffusion coefficients for histologically confirmed intracranial lesions in dogs. Vet Radiol Ultrasound 2011;52:142–148.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • 22. Bucy DS, Brown MS, Bielefeldt-Ohmann H, et al. Early detection of neuropathophysiology using diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging in asymptomatic cats with feline immunodeficiency viral infection. J Neurovirol 2011;17:341–352.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • 23. Hartmann A, Soffler C, Failing K, et al. Diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging of the normal canine brain. Vet Radiol Ultrasound 2014;55:592–598.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • 24. Song JS, Hwang SB, Chung GH, et al. Intra-individual, inter-vendor comparison of diffusion-weighted MR imaging of upper abdominal organs at 3.0 Tesla with an emphasis on the value of normalization with the spleen. Korean J Radiol 2016;17:209–217.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • 25. Chen X, Qin L, Pan D, et al. Liver diffusion-weighted MR imaging: reproducibility comparison of ADC measurements obtained with multiple breath-hold, free-breathing, respiratory-triggered, and navigator-triggered techniques. Radiology 2014;271:113–125.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • 26. Papanikolaou N, Gourtsoyianni S, Yarmenitis S, et al. Comparison between two-point and four-point methods for quantification of apparent diffusion coefficient of normal liver parenchyma and focal lesions. Value of normalization with spleen. Eur J Radiol 2010;73:305–309.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • 27. Do RK, Chandarana H, Felker E, et al. Diagnosis of liver fibrosis and cirrhosis with diffusion-weighted imaging: value of normalized apparent diffusion coefficient using the spleen as reference organ. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2010;195:671–676.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • 28. Jang KM, Kim SH, Lee SJ, et al. Differentiation of an intrapancreatic accessory spleen from a small (<3-cm) solid pancreatic tumor: value of diffusion-weighted MR imaging. Radiology 2013;266:159–167.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • 29. Pandey A, Pandey P, Ghasabeh MA, et al. Accuracy of apparent diffusion coefficient in differentiating pancreatic neuroendocrine tumour from intrapancreatic accessory spleen. Eur Radiol 2018;28:1560–1567.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • 30. Jang KM, Kim SH, Hwang J, et al. Differentiation of malignant from benign focal splenic lesions: added value of diffusion-weighted MRI. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2014;203:803–812.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • 31. Bittencourt LK, Matos C, Coutinho AC Jr. Diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging in the upper abdomen: technical issues and clinical applications. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am 2011;19:111–131.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • 32. Chen XL, Chen TW, Zhang XM, et al. Spleen magnetic resonance diffusion-weighted imaging for quantitative staging hepatic fibrosis in miniature pigs: an initial study. Hepatol Res 2013;43:1231–1240.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • 33. Zhang JL, Sigmund EE, Chandarana H, et al. Variability of renal apparent diffusion coefficients: limitations of the monoexponential model for diffusion quantification. Radiology 2010;254:783–792.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • 34. Cutajar M, Clayden JD, Clark CA, et al. Test-retest reliability and repeatability of renal diffusion tensor MRI in healthy subjects. Eur J Radiol 2011;80:e263–e268.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • 35. Thoeny HC, De Keyzer F, Oyen RH, et al. Diffusion-weighted MR imaging of kidneys in healthy volunteers and patients with parenchymal diseases: initial experience. Radiology 2005;235:911–917.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • 36. Wittsack HJ, Lanzman RS, Mathys C, et al. Statistical evaluation of diffusion-weighted imaging of the human kidney. Magn Reson Med 2010;64:616–622.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • 37. Xu X, Fang W, Ling H, et al. Diffusion-weighted MR imaging of kidneys in patients with chronic kidney disease: initial study. Eur Radiol 2010;20:978–983.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • 38. Cova M, Squillaci E, Stacul F, et al. Diffusion-weighted MRI in the evaluation of renal lesions: preliminary results. Br J Radiol 2004;77:851–857.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • 39. Mürtz P, Flacke S, Traber F, et al. Abdomen: diffusion-weighted MR imaging with pulse-triggered single-shot sequences. Radiology 2002;224:258–264.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • 40. Toyoshima S, Noguchi K, Seto H, et al. Functional evaluation of hydronephrosis by diffusion-weighted MR imaging. Relationship between apparent diffusion coefficient and split glomerular filtration rate. Acta Radiol 2000;41:642–646.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • 41. Laissy JP, Menegazzo D, Dumont E, et al. Hemodynamic effect of iodinated high-viscosity contrast medium in the rat kidney: a diffusion-weighted MRI feasibility study. Invest Radiol 2000;35:647–652.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • 42. Heverhagen JT, Krombach GA, Gizewski E. Application of extracellular gadolinium-based MRI contrast agents and the risk of nephrogenic systemic fibrosis. Rofo 2014;186:661–669.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • 43. Biermann K, Hungerbuhler S, Mischke R, et al. Sedative, cardiovascular, haematologic and biochemical effects of four different drug combinations administered intramuscularly in cats. Vet Anaesth Analg 2012;39:137–150.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • 44. Campagna I, Schwarz A, Keller S, et al. Comparison of the effects of propofol or alfaxalone for anaesthesia induction and maintenance on respiration in cats. Vet Anaesth Analg 2015;42:484–492.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • 45. Hikasa Y, Kawanabe H, Takase K, et al. Comparisons of sevoflurane, isoflurane, and halothane anesthesia in spontaneously breathing cats. Vet Surg 1996;25:234–243.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • 46. Jost G, Endrikat J, Pietsch H. The impact of injector-based contrast agent administration on bolus shape and magnetic resonance angiography image quality. Magn Reson Insights 2017;10:1178623X17705894.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

Advertisement

Editorial Type:
Diagnostic Imaging

Perfusion-weighted and diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging of the liver, spleen, and kidneys of healthy adult male cats

Francesca Del Chicca Dr Med Vet, PhD1, Elena Salesov Dr Med Vet2, Fabiola Joerger Med Vet3, Henning Richter Dr Med Vet4, Claudia E. Reusch Dr Med Vet5, and Patrick R. Kircher Dr Med Vet, PhD6
View More View Less
  • 1 Clinic of Diagnostic Imaging, Vetsuisse Faculty, University of Zurich, 8057 Zurich, Switzerland.
  • | 2 Clinic of Small Animal Internal Medicine, Vetsuisse Faculty, University of Zurich, 8057 Zurich, Switzerland.
  • | 3 Section of Anaesthesiology, Equine Department, Vetsuisse Faculty, University of Zurich, 8057 Zurich, Switzerland.
  • | 4 Clinic of Diagnostic Imaging, Vetsuisse Faculty, University of Zurich, 8057 Zurich, Switzerland.
  • | 5 Clinic of Small Animal Internal Medicine, Vetsuisse Faculty, University of Zurich, 8057 Zurich, Switzerland.
  • | 6 Clinic of Diagnostic Imaging, Vetsuisse Faculty, University of Zurich, 8057 Zurich, Switzerland.
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.2460/ajvr.80.2.159
Volume/Issue:
Volume 80: Issue 2
Online Publication Date:
01 Feb 2019
Restricted access
Reprints and Permissions Purchase Article

Abstract

OBJECTIVE To describe perfusion and diffusion characteristics of the liver, spleen, and kidneys of healthy adult male cats as determined by morphological, perfusion-weighted, and diffusion-weighted MRI.

ANIMALS 12 healthy adult male cats.

PROCEDURES Each cat was anesthetized. Morphological, perfusion-weighted, and diffusion-weighted MRI of the cranial aspect of the abdomen was performed. A region of interest (ROI) was established on MRI images for each of the following structures: liver, spleen, cortex and medulla of both kidneys, and skeletal muscle. Signal intensity was determined, and a time-intensity curve was generated for each ROI. The apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) was calculated for the hepatic and splenic parenchyma and kidneys on diffusion-weighted MRI images. The normalized ADC for the liver was calculated as the ratio of the ADC for the hepatic parenchyma to the ADC for the splenic parenchyma.

RESULTS Perfusion-weighted MRI variables differed among the 5 ROIs. Median ADC of the hepatic parenchyma was 1.38 × 10−3 mm2/s, and mean ± SD normalized ADC for the liver was 1.86 ± 0.18. Median ADC of the renal cortex and renal medulla was 1.65 × 10−3 mm2/s and 1.93 × 10−3 mm2/s, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE Results provided preliminary baseline information about the diffusion and perfusion characteristics of structures in the cranial aspect of the abdomen of healthy adult male cats. Additional studies of cats of different sex and age groups as well as with and without cranial abdominal pathological conditions are necessary to validate and refine these findings.

Contributor Notes

Address correspondence to Dr. Del Chicca (fdelchicca@vetclinics.uzh.ch).