Peer-reviewed veterinary case report
CT and myelography accuracy for disc disease in dogs compared to CT
By Newcomb, Brent et al.·Published in Veterinary surgery : VS·2012·College of Veterinary Medicine, 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 We do not publish original research — every detail traces back to the citation above.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 myelography to a reference standard of computed tomographic myelography for evaluation of dogs with intervertebral disc disease.
- Species:
- dog
Plain-English summary
A group of 30 dogs with sudden back problems suspected to be caused by disc issues underwent three types of imaging tests: computed tomography (CT), myelography, and CT myelography. The results showed that CT was much better at accurately locating the disc problems compared to myelography. Specifically, CT had a sensitivity of 94% for lateral localization, while myelography only reached 64%. This means that if your dog is diagnosed with intervertebral disc disease, CT might be the more reliable option for determining the exact location of the issue, helping your vet decide on the best treatment.
People also search for: dog back pain treatment · intervertebral disc disease diagnosis · CT scan for dog disc problems
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To compare the sensitivity of computed tomography (CT) and myelography to a reference standard of CT myelography for determining localization of Type I intervertebral disc extrusions in dogs. STUDY DESIGN: Prospective blinded comparative study. ANIMALS: Dogs with acute onset myelopathy because of suspected disc extrusions (n = 30). METHODS: Dogs had CT, myelography, and CT myelography to diagnose disc extrusions. Sensitivity of CT and myelography was compared to CT myelography for lateral, longitudinal, and combined localization. Confidence in the assessment of each imaging study was scored by 3 reviewers. RESULTS: Sensitivity of CT for lateral, longitudinal, and combined localization was 94%, 91%, and 81%, respectively, and was 64%, 74%, and 53%, respectively for myelography. Sensitivity of all 3 categories of localization was significantly different between modalities (P < .0001, P = .0031, P < .0001). Significant differences in the sensitivity of lateral and combined localization were found between confidence scores for myelography (P < .0001, P < .0001). Significant differences in the sensitivity of lateral, longitudinal, and combined localization were found between confidence scores for CT (P = .011, P = .013, P = .027). Poor sensitivity was obtained for both modalities except when imaging studies were assigned the highest confidence score. CONCLUSIONS: CT is a more sensitive imaging technique than myelography for localizing disc extrusions when compared to a reference standard of CT myelography. Both modalities yielded high sensitivity with the highest confidence score and poor sensitivity for all other confidence scores.
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/22091972/