Digital radiography and ultrasonography in evaluation of the canine prostate

• Autor(a) principal: Moresco, Bruna Naiara
• Data de Publicação: 2019
• Outros Autores: Gonçalves, Gentil Ferreira
• Tipo de documento: Artigo
• Idioma: eng
• Título da fonte: Semina. Ciências Agrárias (Online)
• Texto Completo: https://ojs.uel.br/revistas/uel/index.php/semagrarias/article/view/32668
• topic: Canine Andrology; Dogs; Imaging diagnosis; Ultrasound; X-ray.; Cães; Diagnóstico por Imagem; Exame Andrológico; Ultrassom; Raios x.

This study aimed to evaluate the canine prostate using ultrasonography and digital radiography. The study involved 21 intact dogs of mixed breed, with a mean weight of 8.7 ± 3.09 kg and without previous hormonal treatment. The dogs were divided into three groups according to the age: GI (0-3 years); GII (3-7 years); GIII (7+ years). Prostates from each animal were qualitatively and quantitatively evaluated by means of digital rectal examination, ultrasonography and digital radiography. A total of 882 measurements were obtained and 84 qualitative analyses. The results demonstrated association and high agreement between digital rectal examination and radiography for prostatomegaly diagnosis (p = 0.0030; K = 0.829268). Ultrasonography and digital rectal examination did not present an association and had low agreement for diagnosis of alterations in prostatic parenchyma (p = 1; K = 0.049383). Also, there was a difference between ultrasonographic and radiographic measurements (height: p = 0.0002; length: p < 0.0001; width: p < 0.0001). However, the measurements from distinct radiographic projections showed no difference between each other (width: p = 0.3543; length: p = 0.3079 and p = 0.9725; height: p = 0.3208). Prostatic volume based on ultrasonographic measurements showed a positive correlation being proportional to the age of the dog (p = 0.0383). It was concluded that both methods, ultrasonography and radiography, are relevant diagnostic tools in evaluating the canine prostate, beyond just complementing each other. There are limitations associated with both imaging methods, which should be taken into consideration when planning a specific investigation of the canine prostate.