4.1 Article

Echocardiographic caudal vena cava measurements in healthy cats and in cats with congestive heart failure and non-cardiac causes of cavitary effusions

Journal

JOURNAL OF VETERINARY CARDIOLOGY
Volume 48, Issue -, Pages 7-18

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.jvc.2023.05.004

Keywords

Feline; Point-of-care ultra-sound; Cardiac; Cardiogenic pulmonary edema; Pleural; Ascites

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study aimed to compare sonographic measurements of the caudal vena cava (CVC) in healthy cats and cats with cardiogenic cavitary effusion (CCE), cardiogenic pulmonary edema (CPE), or non-cardiac causes of cavitary effusion (NCE). The results showed that cats with the diseases had larger CVC measurements compared to healthy cats. Furthermore, the caudal vena cava collapsibility index (CVC-CI) was helpful in distinguishing between cardiogenic and non-cardiogenic etiology.
Background: Echocardiographic indices of the inferior vena cava have been associated with elevated right atrial pressures in humans. Hypothesis/objectives: Describe caudal vena caval (CVC) sonographic dimensions in healthy cats compared to cats with cardiogenic cavitary effusion (CCE), cardio-genic pulmonary edema (CPE), or non-cardiac causes of cavitary effusion (NCE).Animals: 30 healthy control cats and 52 client-owned cats with CCE, CPE, or NCE examined at two university hospitals. Methods: Sagittal 2-dimensional (2D) and M-mode CVC dimensions were acquired from the subxiphoid view. Caudal vena cava collapsibility index (CVC-CI) was calculated. Variables were compared between study groups using Kruskal-Wallis and Dunn's Bonferroni testing. Receiver operating characteristic curves were used to assess sensitivity and specificity for diagnostic categories.Results: Healthy cats had sagittal 2D and M-mode (median, interquartile range) CVC maximal dimensions of 2.4 mm (1.3-4.0) and 3.4 mm (1.5-4.9) and CVC-CI of 52% (45.2-61.8) and 55% (47.8-61.3), respectively. The CVC maximal dimensions in healthy controls were smaller than in cats with cavitary effusions or pulmonary edema (all P<0.05). CVC-CI was different between CCE and NCE (P<0.0001) with cutoffs of CVC-CI <38% (2D) or <29% (M-mode) being 90.5% and 85.7% sensitive, and 94.4% and 100% specific for diagnosis of CCE, respectively.Conclusions and clinical importance: Caudal vena cava measurements are larger in cats with cavitary effusions and cats with CPE than healthy cats. In cats with cavi-tary effusion, decreased CVC-CI, <38% (2D) or <29% (M-mode), was helpful in dis-tinguishing between cardiogenic and noncardiogenic etiology. 2023 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.1
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available