4.2 Article

Contrast-enhanced ultrasonography in normal canine liver. Evaluation of imaging and safety parameters

Journal

VETERINARY RADIOLOGY & ULTRASOUND
Volume 46, Issue 3, Pages 243-250

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/j.1740-8261.2005.00034.x

Keywords

contrast-enhanced ultrasonography; critical difference; dogs; liver; perfusion; safety; SonoVue(TM); time-intensity curves

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Contrast-enhanced ultrasonography, a new imaging modality in veterinary medicine, can provide data on tissue perfusion. The objective of this study was to use the ultrasonographic contrast agent SonoVue (TM) to evaluate various transit time indices in the normal canine liver, to examine the effect of anesthesia on these parameters, and to evaluate the safety of this agent in dogs. The liver of 11 healthy dogs was studied by ultrasound during an intravenous bolus injection of SonoVue (TM). Each dog underwent the examination twice, first with and later without the use of anesthesia. A time-intensity curve was generated from a selected region of interest within the liver from each scanning session. Ratios derived from peak enhancement, time to peak enhancement, up-slope and full-width half-maximum (FWHM) of the curve were calculated from the time-intensity curves, and are reported. There were no statistically significant differences (P > 0.05) in peak enhancement, up-slope and FWHM between dogs that were anesthetized and dogs that were not. Time to peak enhancement, however, was significantly shorter when the dogs were anesthetized than when they were nonanesthetized (P < 0.05). There were no biologically significant changes in clinical laboratory findings. This study indicates that contrast-enhanced ultrasound using SonoVue (TM) gives reproducible liver perfusion data, and appears to be a safe and well-tolerated agent for use in dogs. When considering normal values, the use of anesthetic drugs has, to be considered.

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