Comparison of radiographic methods for detecting radiolucent uroliths in dogs

The purpose of this study was to evaluate and compare positive cystography techniques at 5%, 10%, and 20%, as well as three different double-contrast protocols for detecting radiolucent uroliths with a diameter of less than 3.0 mm in dogs. Six cadavers were used, one was selected at random to repres...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:PloS one 2022-09, Vol.17 (9), p.e0274087-e0274087
Main Authors: Faria, Luciano Alves, Meirelles, Adriana Érica Wilkes Burton, Froes, Tilde Rodrigues, Cintra, Thassila Caccia Feragi, Pereira, Daniel Peixoto, Rodrigues, Marcela Aldrovani, Gouvêa, Fernanda Nastri, Pennacchi, Caio Santos, Assaf, Najla Doutel, Crivellenti, Leandro Zuccolotto
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Animals
Biology and Life Sciences
Bladder
Cadavers
Calculi, Urinary
Catheters
Comparative analysis
Computer and Information Sciences
Diagnosis
Diagnostic systems
Dogs
Engineering and Technology
Health aspects
Medical instruments
Medicine and Health Sciences
Methods
Radiography
Radiology
Sensitivity
Statistical analysis
Urogenital system
Values
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:The purpose of this study was to evaluate and compare positive cystography techniques at 5%, 10%, and 20%, as well as three different double-contrast protocols for detecting radiolucent uroliths with a diameter of less than 3.0 mm in dogs. Six cadavers were used, one was selected at random to represent the negative control, and the others were submitted to urolith implantation in the bladder by urethral catheter. Three radiology professionals blindly accessed ventrodorsal and -lateral projections of each test. Contrast at 20% showed greater diagnostic sensitivity, but with greater difficulty identifying the number and size of the uroliths. Consequently, double-contrast techniques are better and should be used for diagnostic and therapeutic planning. Sensitivity and specificity tests demonstrated that positive 5% cystography and different concentrations of double contrast obtained better results in terms of sensitivity and specificity. However, due to the presence of a greater amount of artifacts in the 5% cystography, it is suggested that double contrast is used for this purpose, especially with the removal of contrast excess (protocol 2).
ISSN:1932-6203
1932-6203
DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0274087