Peer-reviewed veterinary case report
How to tell heart vs non-heart causes of belly fluid in dogs
By Morey, Alice G N et al.·Published in Journal of veterinary internal medicine·2023·Department of Veterinary Medicine Surgery, 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 We do not publish original research — every detail traces back to the citation above.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: N-terminal brain natriuretic peptide, cardiac troponin-I, and point-of-care ultrasound in dogs with cardiac and noncardiac causes of nonhemorrhagic ascites.
- Species:
- dog
Plain-English summary
A group of 60 dogs with fluid buildup in their abdomen (nonhemorrhagic ascites) were evaluated to determine if their condition was due to heart problems or other causes. Blood tests measuring NT-proBNP levels showed that dogs with heart-related issues had significantly higher levels compared to those with non-heart-related causes. Additionally, ultrasound findings indicated more severe signs of heart issues in the affected dogs. These tests can help veterinarians better diagnose the underlying cause of abdominal fluid in dogs, leading to more effective treatment options.
People also search for: dog ascites causes · NT-proBNP test for dogs · ultrasound for dog heart problems
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Nonhemorrhagic ascites (NHA) can be caused by cardiac diseases (cNHA) and noncardiac diseases (ncNHA). N-terminal brain natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP), cardiac troponin-I (cTnI), and point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) may differentiate between cNHA and ncNHA. HYPOTHESIS/OBJECTIVES: We compared NT-proBNP and cTnI concentrations as well as POCUS findings in dogs presented with cNHA and ncNHA. ANIMALS: Dogs (n = 60) were enrolled based on identification of NHA with an effusion packed cell volume < 10%. METHODS: Blood samples were collected and POCUS was performed on all dogs. Dogs were diagnosed with cNHA (n = 28) or ncNHA (n = 32) based on echocardiography. The cNHA group was subdivided into cardiac non-pericardial disease (n = 17) and pericardial disease (n = 11). RESULTS: The NT-proBNP concentration (median; range pmol/L) was significantly higher in the cNHA group (4510; 250-10 000) compared to the ncNHA group (739.5; 250-10 000; P = .01), with a sensitivity of 53.8% and specificity of 85.7% using a cut-off of 4092 pmol/L. The NT-proBNP concentrations were significantly higher in the cardiac non-pericardial disease group (8339; 282-10 000) compared with the pericardial disease group (692.5; 250-4928; P = .002). A significant difference in cTnI concentration (median; range ng/L) between the cNHA group (300; 23-112 612) and ncNHA group (181; 17-37 549) was not detected (P = .41). A significantly higher number of dogs had hepatic venous and caudal vena cava distension in the cNHA group compared to the ncNHA group, respectively (18/28 vs 3/29, P < .0001 and 13/27 vs 2/29, P < .001). Gall bladder wall edema was not significantly different between groups (4/28 vs 3/29, P = .74). CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPORTANCE: NT-proBNP concentration and POCUS help distinguish between cNHA and ncNHA.
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/37060291/