Gastrointestinal ulceration is the focus of this week’s article, with information taken from the published abstract by Fitzgerald E et al, ‘Clinical findings and results of diagnostic imaging in 82 dogs with gastrointestinal ulceration’, The Journal of Small Animal Practice, 2017 Apr; 58(4):211-218.

Dogs with gastrointestinal ulceration were assessed through imagery and clinically, whilst any differences in dogs with perforated versus non-perforated ulcers were also examined. It should be noted that all research was carried out retrospectively (via access to medical records). Furthermore, the authors also wanted to look at how 3 different techniques differed during examination – radiography, computed tomography and ultrasonography.

The results of this study revealed links between a number of clinical signs and the presence of gastrointestinal ulceration. Notably, vomiting was shown to be positively associated here with a weaker link between weight loss and gastrointestinal ulceration. When comparing dogs with non-perforated and perforated ulcers, the differences in 3-4 clinical factors were looked at. Full results can be found in the abstract, although briefly the biggest difference appeared to be in the percentage of peritoneal fluid found (21% vs. 83%).

One of the most significant findings of this study was in the type of examination carried out. Interestingly, in dogs with non-perforated ulcers all 3 types of technique (radiography, computed tomography and ultrasonography) had lower sensitivities when compared to those with perforated ulcers. In the former group, computed tomography and ultrasonography both had similar results (67% vs. 65%), whereas radiography was considerably lower (30%). The latter group showed similar patterns for both computed tomography and ultrasonography, albeit with greater results (93% and 86% respectively), with radiography also showing greater sensitivity here, identifying perforated ulcers in 79% of cases.

These findings suggest that both computed tomography and ultrasonography would be good techniques in identifying non-perforated and perforated ulcers, with computed tomography having particular advantages in ulcer detection and establishing the presence of any kind of perforation.

For more information on using ultrasound imaging in dogs, please feel free to contact us or click here.

 

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28276120