PetCaseFinder

Peer-reviewed veterinary case report

MRI versus X-rays for checking nasal tumors in dogs

By Petite, A F B & Dennis, R·Published in The Journal of small animal practice·2006·Centre for Small Animal Studies, 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 We do not publish original research — every detail traces back to the citation above.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: Comparison of radiography and magnetic resonance imaging for evaluating the extent of nasal neoplasia in dogs.

Species:
dog

Plain-English summary

A group of 12 dogs with nasal tumors underwent both X-rays and MRI to see which imaging method better showed the extent of their cancer. The MRI often revealed that the tumors were larger than what the X-rays indicated and could show important details like whether the tumor had spread to nearby areas. While X-rays were good for spotting the tumor and assessing major changes, MRI provided a clearer picture of how far the cancer had spread, which is crucial for planning treatment. This study suggests that MRI is a valuable tool for understanding the full extent of nasal tumors in dogs.

People also search for: dog nasal tumor treatment · MRI vs X-ray for dogs · dog cancer spread symptoms

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is increasingly used in veterinary practice and, in some centres, is part of the diagnostic work-up of small animals with nasal disease. However, there are no published studies which critically evaluate the use of magnetic resonance imaging for this purpose. The purpose of this work was to assess the changes seen using magnetic resonance imaging and to compare them with radiography. METHODS: The study included 12 dogs that had undergone both radiography and magnetic resonance imaging of the nasal cavity and had a histopathological diagnosis of malignant nasal neoplasia. Two pairs of board-certified radiologists scored the radiographs and the MRI scans, evaluating 10 signs of abnormality using a simple scoring system. Magnetic resonance imaging features were described in detail, and radiographic and magnetic resonance imaging scores for each sign as well as total scores were compared. RESULTS: Magnetic resonance imaging often showed that the tumour was more extensive than it had appeared on radiography but occasionally showed that radiographs had overestimated its size. Although radiography was reliable for assessment of the presence and size of a mass and for the extent of turbinate destruction, it usually failed to show occlusion of the major airway passages that were evident on magnetic resonance imaging. Extension of the tumour into the opposite nasal cavity, frontal sinus, orbit and cranial cavity was shown much better on magnetic resonance imaging. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Minor but significant extension beyond the nasal cavity, which is important for treatment planning and prognosis, requires magnetic resonance imaging for demonstration, although radiography shows major changes reliably.

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/16961471/