Peer-reviewed veterinary case report
Ultrasound liver biopsy in dogs comparing suction and no suction
By Fleming, K L et al.·Published in Veterinary journal (London, England : 1997)·2019·School of Veterinary Science, United Kingdom·View original on PubMed →
PetCaseFinder translated the abstract of this peer-reviewed paper into plain English so pet owners can read it. We do not publish original research — every detail traces back to the citation above. How we work →
Original publication title: A randomised controlled comparison of aspiration and non-aspiration fine-needle techniques for obtaining ultrasound-guided cytological samples from canine livers.
- Species:
- dog
Plain-English summary
A group of 119 dogs needing liver testing had their liver cells sampled using two different methods: one with suction (fine-needle aspiration) and one without (non-aspiration). The results showed that the non-aspiration method provided better quality samples, leading to more accurate diagnoses. In fact, 93.9% of the samples taken without suction were diagnostic, compared to 81.5% with suction. This means that for liver testing in dogs, using the non-aspiration technique is likely the better choice for getting clear and useful results.
People also search for: dog liver test results · fine-needle aspiration vs non-aspiration for dogs · liver cytology in dogs
Abstract
Ultrasound-guided fine-needle sampling to obtain cytological samples is a well-established technique. However, the application of suction during sampling is controversial. Evidence from the human literature and one previous veterinary study suggest that non-aspiration may be superior for a number of organs. This prospective study compared the quality and diagnostic value of cytological samples from canine livers obtained by fine-needle aspiration (FNA) and non-aspiration (FN-NA) techniques. A total of 119 dogs that required ultrasound-guided FNA of the liver as part of their clinical investigation were recruited and randomly assigned to either FNA (n=54) or FN-NA (n=65) sampling groups. Specimens were reviewed by external cytopathologists masked to the technique used. Cytological reports were reviewed for their overall diagnostic value, cellularity, cell preservation and haemodilution. Overall, 88.2% (95% confidence intervals [CI], 82.4-94.0) of samples were diagnostic. There was a significant difference, as demonstrated by Chi-squared statistical analysis, in the prevalence of diagnostic samples between the FNA (81.5%; 95% CI, 71.1-91.8) and FN-NA groups (93.9%; 95% CI, 88.0-99.7; P=0.037). Non-diagnostic samples were significantly associated with lower cellularity, poorer cell preservation and more severe haemodilution (P<0.001 for each). However, there were no significant differences in the frequency of these specific variables between the FNA and FN-NA groups. In this study, fine-needle non-aspiration was superior to an aspiration technique for sampling the canine liver, as it resulted in higher rates of diagnostic cytology samples, with greater cellularity, less haemodilution and better cytological preservation.
Find similar cases for your pet
PetCaseFinder finds other peer-reviewed reports of pets with the same symptoms, plus a plain-English summary of what was tried across them.
Search related cases →Original publication on PubMed: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31554588/