4.2 Article

CONTRAST-ENHANCED ULTRASONOGRAPHY OF THE NORMAL CANINE ADRENAL GLAND

Journal

VETERINARY RADIOLOGY & ULTRASOUND
Volume 52, Issue 5, Pages 560-567

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/j.1740-8261.2011.01823.x

Keywords

adrenal gland; canine; contrast-enhanced ultrasonography

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Contrast-enhanced ultrasonography is useful in differentiating adrenal gland adenomas from nonadenomatous lesions in human patients. The purposes of this study were to evaluate the feasibility and to describe contrast-enhanced ultrasonography of the normal canine adrenal gland. Six healthy female Beagles were injected with an intravenous bolus of a lipid-shelled contrast agent (SonoVue (R)). The aorta enhanced immediately followed by the renal artery and then the adrenal gland. Adrenal gland enhancement was uniform, centrifugal, and rapid from the medulla to the cortex. When maximum enhancement was reached, a gradual homogeneous decrease in echogenicity of the adrenal gland began and simultaneously enhancement of the phrenicoabdominal vessels was observed. While enhancement kept decreasing in the adrenal parenchyma, the renal vein, caudal vena cava, and phrenicoabdominal vein were characterized by persistent enhancement until the end of the study. A second contrast enhancement was observed, corresponding to the refilling time. Objective measurements were performed storing the images for off-line image analysis using Image J (ImageJ (c)). The shape of the time-intensity curve reflecting adrenal perfusion was similar in all dogs. Ratios of the values of the cortex and the medulla to the values of the renal artery were characterized by significant differences from initial upslope to the peak allowing differentiation between the cortex and the medulla for both adrenal glands only in this time period. Contrast-enhanced ultrasonography of the adrenal glands is feasible in dogs and the optimal time for adrenal imaging is between 5 and 90 s after injection. (c) 2011 Veterinary Radiology & Ultrasound, Vol. 52, No. 5, 2011, pp 560-567.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available