Search Results

You are looking at 1 - 3 of 3 items for

  • Author or Editor: Olivier Taeymans x
  • Refine by Access: All Content x
Clear All Modify Search

Abstract

OBJECTIVE To determine from MRI measurements whether soft palate length (SPL) and thickness are correlated in dogs, evaluate the association between the olfactory bulb angle (OBA) and degree of brachycephalia, and determine the correlation between soft palate–epiglottis overlap and OBA in dogs.

ANIMALS 50 brachycephalic and 50 nonbrachycephalic client-owned dogs without abnormalities of the head.

PROCEDURES Medical records and archived midsagittal T2-weighted MRI images of brachycephalic and nonbrachycephalic dogs' heads were reviewed. Group assignment was based on breed. Data collected included weight, SPL and thickness, OBA, and the distance between the caudal extremity of the soft palate and the basihyoid. Soft palate length and thickness were adjusted on the basis of body weight.

RESULTS Brachycephalic dogs had significantly thicker soft palates and lower OBAs, compared with findings for nonbrachycephalic dogs. There was a significant negative correlation (r2 = 0.45) between OBA and soft palate thickness. The correlation between SPL and OBA was less profound (r2 = 0.09). The distance between the caudal extremity of the soft palate and the basihyoid was shorter in brachycephalic dogs than in nonbrachycephalic dogs. The percentage of epiglottis–soft palate overlap significantly decreased with increasing OBA (r2 = 0.31).

CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE Results indicated that MRI images can be consistently used to assess anatomic landmarks for measurement of SPL and thickness, OBA, and soft palate-to-epiglottis distance in brachycephalic and nonbrachycephalic dogs. The percentage of epiglottis–soft palate overlap was significantly greater in brachycephalic dogs and was correlated to the degree of brachycephalia.

Full access
in American Journal of Veterinary Research

Abstract

Objective—To obtain ultrasonographic reference values for the thickness of the pancreas and the diameter of the pancreatic duct in clinically normal dogs.

Animals—242 adult dogs with no clinical signs of gastrointestinal tract disease.

Procedures—The maximum pancreatic thickness and the diameter of the pancreatic duct were recorded ultrasonographically at the level of the left lobe, body, and right lobe of the pancreas.

Results—Mean ± SD pancreatic thickness measurements were as follows: left lobe, 6.5 ± 1.7 mm (n = 214); body, 6.3 ± 1.6 mm (155); and right lobe, 8.1 ± 1.8 mm (239). The mean pancreatic duct diameter was 0.6 ± 0.2 mm (n = 42) in the left lobe and 0.7 ± 0.2 mm (213) in the right lobe. The right pancreatic duct was visible in 213/242 (88.0%) dogs, and the left pancreatic duct was visible in 41/242 (16.9%) dogs. However, the body was visible in only 16/242 (6.6%) dogs. Pancreatic thickness and diameter of the pancreatic duct significantly increased with body weight in all lobes, but age was not correlated with the measurements.

Conclusions and Clinical Relevance—Ultrasonographic reference values for the pancreas and pancreatic duct of dogs were determined. Results of this study indicated that the pancreatic duct was visible, especially in the right lobe of the pancreas. These values may be useful for the assessment of pancreatic abnormalities, such as chronic pancreatitis and exocrine pancreatic insufficiency.

Full access
in American Journal of Veterinary Research

Abstract

Objective—To determine the incidence of adverse events within 24 hours after contrast-enhanced ultrasonography (CEUS) in dogs and cats and compare the risk of death within 24 hours after imaging for animals that underwent ultrasonography with and without injection of a contrast agent.

Design—Retrospective case-control study.

Animals—750 animals (411 case dogs, 238 control dogs, 77 case cats, and 24 control cats).

Procedures—At 11 institutions, medical records were reviewed of dogs and cats that had CEUS performed (cases) as were medical records of dogs and cats with clinical signs similar to those of case animals that had ultrasonography performed without injection of a contrast agent (controls). Information regarding signalment; preexisting disease; type, dose, and administration route of contrast agent used; immediate (within 1 hour after CEUS) and delayed (> 1 and ≤ 24 hours after CEUS) adverse events; and occurrence and cause of death (when available) was extracted from each medical record. Risk of death within 24 hours after ultrasonography was compared between case and control animals.

Results—Of the 411 case dogs, 3 had immediate adverse events (vomiting or syncope) and 1 had a delayed adverse event (vomiting). No adverse events were recorded for case cats. Twenty-three of 357 (6.4%) clinically ill case animals and 14 of 262 (5.3%) clinically ill control animals died within 24 hours after ultrasonography; risk of death did not differ between cases and controls.

Conclusions and Clinical Relevance—Results indicated that CEUS was safe in dogs and cats.

Restricted access
in Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association