Peer-reviewed veterinary case report
Safety of ultrasound-guided pancreas needle biopsy in healthy dogs
By Kook, P H et al.·Published in Journal of veterinary internal medicine·2012·Vetsuisse Faculty·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 We do not publish original research — every detail traces back to the citation above.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: Feasibility and safety of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration of the pancreas in dogs.
- Species:
- dog
Plain-English summary
A group of 13 healthy beagles underwent a procedure called endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) to check their pancreas. The vets used a special ultrasound tool to guide a needle into the pancreas to collect samples for testing. While they could see parts of the pancreas in most dogs, the procedure was successful in 12 of them, and the samples were good enough for evaluation in eight cases. All the dogs recovered well without any complications during the 48 hours after the procedure. This method appears to be safe and could help diagnose pancreatic issues in dogs in the future.
People also search for: dog pancreas problems · EUS-FNA for dogs · beagle pancreatic disease diagnosis
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided fine needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) has proven a useful and safe diagnostic tool for assessing pancreatic disease in human medicine. No information about pancreatic EUS-FNA is available in dogs. OBJECTIVES: To assess the feasibility and safety of pancreatic EUS-FNA in healthy dogs. ANIMALS: Thirteen beagles with a median body weight of 13.4 kg. METHODS: Experimental study. An ultrasound endoscope (insertion tube outer diameter 11.8 mm) was used, and FNA was carried out with 19 G needles. The optimal puncture site was chosen with the aid of Doppler imaging. Complete clinicopathologic assessments including pain scoring and pancreas-specific lipase measurements were obtained before EUS as well as on day 1 and day 2 after EUS-FNA. RESULTS: The pancreatic body was identified in all dogs, the left lobe was clearly identified in 9/13 and appeared indistinctly marginated in 4/13 dogs, and the distal third of the right lobe could not be identified in 7/13 dogs. EUS-FNA was carried out in 12/13 dogs. Cellularity of smears was adequate for evaluation in 8/12 cases, in which samples were obtained transgastrically (n = 4) or transduodenally (n = 4). All dogs recovered uneventfully and no clinical and laboratory abnormalities occurred during the 48 hour monitoring period after the procedure. CONCLUSION AND CLINICAL IMPORTANCE: Although the healthy canine pancreas is difficult to visualize in its entirety with EUS, pancreatic EUS-FNA with a 19 G needle is feasible in medium-sized dogs and can be considered a safe procedure. Its diagnostic usefulness should be evaluated in dogs with pancreatic disease.
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/22404436/