PetCaseFinder

Peer-reviewed veterinary case report

Safety and accuracy of spleen biopsy tests in dogs

By Watson, Adam T et al.·Published in Veterinary radiology & ultrasound : the official journal of the American College of Veterinary Radiology and the International Veterinary Radiology Association·2011·Department of 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 We do not publish original research — every detail traces back to the citation above.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: Safety and correlation of test results of combined ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration and needle core biopsy of the canine spleen.

Species:
dog

Plain-English summary

A group of 41 dogs with splenic lumps underwent two types of tests: a fine-needle aspiration (FNA) and a needle core biopsy (NCB) to check for issues like tumors or other changes. The tests were safe, with no complications reported. Out of the dogs tested, 17 were found to have tumors, while 20 had benign changes, and 2 were normal. The results showed that using both tests together can help veterinarians get a clearer picture of what’s happening in the spleen, especially when it comes to identifying tumors.

People also search for: dog spleen lump biopsy · canine splenic tumor diagnosis · fine-needle aspiration for dogs

Abstract

The safety and diagnostic value of combined splenic fine-needle aspiration (FNA) and needle core biopsy (NCB) is unknown. Forty-one dogs with splenic lesions were studied prospectively. Safety was assessed in 38 dogs and no complications were encountered. Initially, clinical and anatomic pathologists reviewed each FNA and NCB sample, respectively, without knowledge of the other's results. Diagnoses were categorized as neoplastic, benign, inflammatory, normal, or nondiagnostic. The level of agreement between sampling methods was categorized as complete, partial, disagreement, or not available. Test correlation was performed in 40 dogs. Nondiagnostic results occurred in 5/40 NCB (12.5%) and no FNA samples. Neoplasia was diagnosed in 17/40 dogs (42.5%), benign changes in 20/40 dogs (50%), inflammatory disorders in 0/40 dogs, and normal 2/40 dogs (5%). One of the 40 dogs (2.5%) had a diagnosis that was equivocal for neoplasia on both tests and therefore was not categorized. Of the 35 dogs that had diagnostic samples, cytopathologic and histopathologic diagnoses agreed completely in 18/35 dogs (51.4%), partially in 3/35 dogs (8.6%), and were in disagreement in 14/35 dogs (40.0%). Pathologists collaboratively reviewed diagnoses that were in disagreement or partial agreement and altered their individual diagnoses in 6/17 dogs (35.3%) to be within partial or complete agreement, respectively. Percutaneous FNA and NCB can be performed safely in dogs with sonographic splenic changes. Results suggest that adding NCB to FNA provides complementary information in dogs with suspected splenic neoplasia. This combined protocol may improve detection of splenic neoplasia and provide neoplastic subclassification.

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/21554481/