PetCaseFinder

Peer-reviewed veterinary case report

CT versus MRI for checking nasal tumors in dogs

By Drees, R et al.·Published in The Journal of small animal practice·2009·Department of Surgical Sciences, United States·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 We do not publish original research — every detail traces back to the citation above.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: Comparison of computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging for the evaluation of canine intranasal neoplasia.

Species:
dog

Plain-English summary

A group of 21 dogs with confirmed nasal tumors underwent both computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) to see which method was better for evaluating their condition. The results showed that CT was more effective at detecting bone damage and thickening of the nasal lining, while MRI was better at spotting small amounts of fluid in the nasal cavity. However, both imaging techniques were equally good at showing fluid in the frontal sinuses. Ultimately, CT proved to be a reliable option for diagnosing nasal tumors in dogs without involving the brain, meaning MRI may not be necessary in those cases.

People also search for: dog nasal tumor diagnosis · CT vs MRI for dog cancer · canine intranasal neoplasia treatment

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: Canine intranasal neoplasia is commonly evaluated using computed tomography to indicate the diagnosis, to determine disease extent, to guide histological sampling location and to plan treatment. With the expanding use of magnetic resonance imaging in veterinary medicine, this modality has been recently applied for the same purpose. The aim of this study was to compare the features of canine intranasal neoplasia using computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging. METHODS: Twenty-one dogs with confirmed intranasal neoplasia underwent both computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging. The images were reviewed retrospectively for the bony and soft tissue features of intranasal neoplasia. RESULTS: Overall computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging performed very similarly. However, lysis of bones bordering the nasal cavity and mucosal thickening was found on computed tomography images more often than on magnetic resonance images. Small amounts of fluid in the nasal cavity were more often seen on magnetic resonance images. However, fluid in the frontal sinuses was seen equally well with both modalities. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: We conclude that computed tomography is satisfactory for evaluation of canine intranasal neoplasia, and no clinically relevant benefit is gained using magnetic resonance imaging for intranasal neoplasia without extent into the cranial cavity.

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/19508490/