Peer-reviewed veterinary case report
Are 3mm liver biopsy samples as good as 5mm in dogs
By Larose, Philippe Chagnon et al.·Published in Veterinary surgery : VS·2024·Department of Clinical Studies, Canada·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 We do not publish original research — every detail traces back to the citation above.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: Comparing 3 mm and 5 mm laparoscopic liver biopsy samples in dogs.
- Species:
- dog
Plain-English summary
Ten dogs underwent a laparoscopic liver biopsy to collect tissue samples using two different sizes of biopsy tools: 3mm and 5mm. The results showed that while the 3mm samples were smaller and collected fewer portal triads (a structure in the liver), they still provided enough tissue for accurate diagnosis and testing for copper levels and infections. Both sizes of samples resulted in minimal bleeding, and the agreement on the diagnosis between the two sizes was very high. This means that using the smaller tool can be a good option for liver biopsies in dogs without sacrificing diagnostic quality.
People also search for: dog liver biopsy results · laparoscopic liver biopsy in dogs · liver disease diagnosis in dogs
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To determine whether 3 mm cup biopsy forceps (CBF) provide equivalent diagnostic samples to 5 mm CBF for histopathologic diagnosis, bacterial culture, and copper quantification. STUDY DESIGN: Clinical prospective study. ANIMALS: Ten client-owned dogs, presenting for laparoscopic liver biopsy (LLB). METHODS: Dogs underwent LLB, and paired samples were collected using 3 and 5 mm CBF. Portal triad and hepatic lobule counts, crush and fragmentation artifacts, copper concentration, bacterial culture results, and agreement on histopathologic diagnosis were compared. RESULTS: Both CBF sizes allowed for easy sample collection and resulted in minimal hemorrhage. An average of 12.13 (confidence limit (CL): 9.4-14.9) and 17.84 (CL: 15.1-20.6) portal triads were obtained using a 3 and 5 mm CBF, respectively (p = .0003). A portal triad count of 11 or more was achieved in 73.3% of the 3 mm and 93.3% of the 5 mm samples. Gwets AC1 coefficient showed a high level of agreement (0.8) for overall histopathologic diagnosis (p < .0001). The 3 mm CBF crush scores were higher (median of the differences: -1; range: -1 to 1) (p = .035). There was no difference in fragmentation scores (p = .935). CONCLUSION: The 3 mm CBF yielded smaller samples in terms of size and portal triad count compared with the 5 mm CBF. However, the portal triad count was sufficient in a majority of samples and histologic agreement with the 5 mm CBF was excellent. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: In dogs, a 3 mm CBF yields adequate samples for histopathologic interpretation, copper quantification, and bacterial culture.
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/37530591/