Peer-reviewed veterinary case report
Complications of transesophageal heart ultrasound in dogs with heart
By Stoner, Caitlin H et al.·Published in Journal of veterinary internal medicine·2022·Department of Small Animal Clinical Sciences, 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 We do not publish original research — every detail traces back to the citation above.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: Prospective evaluation of complications associated with transesophageal echocardiography in dogs with congenital heart disease.
- Species:
- dog
Plain-English summary
Four dogs with congenital heart disease underwent a procedure called transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) to help assess their heart conditions. After the procedure, some mild complications were noted, including minor damage to the esophagus in four dogs and signs of nausea in four others. The procedure was generally safe, with no major complications reported, but it highlighted the importance of considering the dog's size and the type of probe used. Overall, the dogs were monitored closely, and the complications were manageable.
People also search for: dog congenital heart disease treatment · transesophageal echocardiography risks in dogs · dog nausea after heart procedure
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) is useful in the assessment and procedural monitoring of congenital heart disease (CHD) with a relatively low complication rate in humans. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the safety of TEE and report complications in dogs. ANIMALS: Forty client-owned dogs with CHD. METHODS: Prospective observational study including gastroesophagoscopy before and after TEE imaging. TEE was planned with a GE 6VT-D adult probe in dogs weighing ≥4 kg and a GE 10T-D microprobe alternating with an intracardiac echocardiography probe placed in the esophagus in dogs <4 kg. Difficulties with probe placement, probe interference and TEE probe imaging times were recorded. Dogs were monitored in the recovery period after TEE using an established nausea scoring system. RESULTS: New gastroesophageal abnormalities were identified after TEE in 4 dogs including 4 areas of mucosal damage involving <25% of the lower esophageal sphincter (n = 4) and 1 lesion at the heart base (n = 1) and were not attributed to longer imaging times or a specific probe. Lesions identified before TEE in 4 dogs remained unchanged after TEE. The 6VT-D probe could not be placed in 1 dog with enlarged tonsils, and it obstructed fluoroscopic views in 3 dogs. The probes did not compress any structures in dogs in which fluoroscopy was performed (n = 20). Four dogs had evidence to suggest nausea after the procedure. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPORTANCE: While major complications remain possible, complications in this study were mild and few in number. Dog size and probe characteristics are factors to consider when performing TEE.
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/34997940/