Peer-reviewed veterinary case report
Safety and use of ultrasound kidney tests in cats and dogs
By Etedali, Nahvid M et al.·Published in Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association·2019·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 We do not publish original research — every detail traces back to the citation above.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: Complications and clinical utility of ultrasonographically guided pyelocentesis and antegrade pyelography in cats and dogs: 49 cases (2007-2015).
Plain-English summary
A group of 39 cats and 10 dogs underwent a procedure called pyelocentesis (a way to collect urine from the kidney) and antegrade pyelography (a type of imaging) to investigate urinary tract issues. The procedures were generally safe, with a 25% overall complication rate, mostly minor issues. The imaging technique was highly effective, diagnosing problems in 94% of cases. These methods can help veterinarians identify issues in the upper urinary tract, such as blockages, and are considered reliable for diagnosing kidney-related problems in pets.
People also search for: cat urinary tract problems treatment · dog kidney disease diagnosis · pyelography for pets · complications of kidney procedures in dogs and cats
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To describe the diagnostic utility and clinical safety of ultrasonographically guided percutaneous pyelocentesis and antegrade pyelography in cats and dogs. DESIGN: Retrospective case series. ANIMALS: 39 cats and 10 dogs with 55 affected kidneys. PROCEDURES: Medical records were reviewed to identify cats and dogs that underwent ultrasonographically guided pyelocentesis and antegrade pyelography between June 1, 2007, and December 31, 2015. Data collected included procedure descriptions; results of diagnostic imaging, urine cytologic evaluation, and bacterial culture; and evidence of complications. Animals were assigned to the pyelocentesis group (underwent only pyelocentesis) or to the antegrade pyelography group (underwent pyelocentesis followed immediately by pyelography). RESULTS: The diagnostic rate for pyelography was 94% (31/33; 95% confidence interval [CI], 80.4% to 98.9%). The total, minor, and major complication rates for both treatment groups combined were 25% (95% CI, 15.8% to 38.3%), 24% (95% CI, 14.4% to 36.3%), and 2% (95% CI, 0.09% to 9.6%), respectively. Performing bacterial culture of urine obtained by pyelocentesis did not provide an advantage over performing bacterial culture of urine obtained from the lower urinary tract. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Findings indicated that ultrasonographically guided pyelocentesis and antegrade pyelography were well-tolerated techniques for investigating upper urinary tract disease in cats and dogs and that pyelography had a higher diagnostic rate than previously reported; therefore, pyelography should be considered for identification of mechanical and functional ureteral patency abnormalities in cats and dogs.
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/30888270/