Comparisons of computed tomography, contrast enhanced computed tomography and standing low-field magnetic resonance imaging in horses with lameness localised to the foot. Part 1: Anatomic visualisation scores

S. A. Vallance, R. J W Bell, Mathieu Spriet, Philip H Kass, S. M. Puchalski

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

17 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Reasons for performing study: To date, few reports exist comparing magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and computed tomography (CT) for imaging of the equine distal limb, yet clinicians are required to decide which modality to use regularly. Objectives: To report and compare anatomic visualisation scores obtained for CT, contrast enhanced CT (CECT) and standing low-field MRI (LFMRI) in the equine foot. Hypothesis: Anatomic visualisation score discrepancies would exist between CT, CECT and LFMRI. Methods: Images of 22 lame horses (31 limbs) undergoing both CT and LFMRI of the foot were reviewed. When available, CECT images were reviewed. The deep digital flexor tendon (DDFT) was categorised into proximal to distal levels (A-D), structures were assigned visualisation scores (Grades 0-3) and technique comparisons were made using the paired marginal homogeneity test. Results: Computed tomography and LFMRI had similar visibility scores for the navicular bone, middle phalanx, DDFT-B, collateral ligaments of the distal interphalangeal joint and collateral sesamoidean ligament of the navicular bone. The proximal and distal phalanx had lower visibility scores with LFMRI. The distal DDFT (C-D), distal sesamoidean impar ligament and synovial structures had higher scores with LFMRI. Contrast enhanced CT lowered DDFT and collateral sesamoidean ligament scores and raised distal interphalangeal synovium CT visualisation scores. Conclusions and potential relevance: Visualisation scores differ depending on imaging technique and anatomic structure of interest. This information increases our understanding of the limitations of CT, CECT and LFMRI to visualise anatomy in clinical cases.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)51-56
Number of pages6
JournalEquine Veterinary Journal
Volume44
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 2012

Fingerprint

computed tomography
magnetic resonance imaging
lameness
Horses
Foot
Tomography
Magnetic Resonance Imaging
horses
ligaments
tendons
Collateral Ligaments
Tendons
phalanges
limbs (animal)
Extremities
bones
image analysis
Bone and Bones
Synovial Membrane
Ligaments

Keywords

  • Anatomic visualisation
  • Computed tomography
  • Contrast enhanced CT
  • Foot
  • Horse
  • Lameness
  • Magnetic resonance imaging

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Equine

Cite this

@article{131fbd2125d8424d8e5cfa4d2bba2a3f,
title = "Comparisons of computed tomography, contrast enhanced computed tomography and standing low-field magnetic resonance imaging in horses with lameness localised to the foot. Part 1: Anatomic visualisation scores",
abstract = "Reasons for performing study: To date, few reports exist comparing magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and computed tomography (CT) for imaging of the equine distal limb, yet clinicians are required to decide which modality to use regularly. Objectives: To report and compare anatomic visualisation scores obtained for CT, contrast enhanced CT (CECT) and standing low-field MRI (LFMRI) in the equine foot. Hypothesis: Anatomic visualisation score discrepancies would exist between CT, CECT and LFMRI. Methods: Images of 22 lame horses (31 limbs) undergoing both CT and LFMRI of the foot were reviewed. When available, CECT images were reviewed. The deep digital flexor tendon (DDFT) was categorised into proximal to distal levels (A-D), structures were assigned visualisation scores (Grades 0-3) and technique comparisons were made using the paired marginal homogeneity test. Results: Computed tomography and LFMRI had similar visibility scores for the navicular bone, middle phalanx, DDFT-B, collateral ligaments of the distal interphalangeal joint and collateral sesamoidean ligament of the navicular bone. The proximal and distal phalanx had lower visibility scores with LFMRI. The distal DDFT (C-D), distal sesamoidean impar ligament and synovial structures had higher scores with LFMRI. Contrast enhanced CT lowered DDFT and collateral sesamoidean ligament scores and raised distal interphalangeal synovium CT visualisation scores. Conclusions and potential relevance: Visualisation scores differ depending on imaging technique and anatomic structure of interest. This information increases our understanding of the limitations of CT, CECT and LFMRI to visualise anatomy in clinical cases.",
keywords = "Anatomic visualisation, Computed tomography, Contrast enhanced CT, Foot, Horse, Lameness, Magnetic resonance imaging",
author = "Vallance, {S. A.} and Bell, {R. J W} and Mathieu Spriet and Kass, {Philip H} and Puchalski, {S. M.}",
year = "2012",
month = "1",
doi = "10.1111/j.2042-3306.2011.00372.x",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "44",
pages = "51--56",
journal = "Equine veterinary journal. Supplement",
issn = "2042-3306",
publisher = "British Equine Veterinary Association",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Comparisons of computed tomography, contrast enhanced computed tomography and standing low-field magnetic resonance imaging in horses with lameness localised to the foot. Part 1

T2 - Anatomic visualisation scores

AU - Vallance, S. A.

AU - Bell, R. J W

AU - Spriet, Mathieu

AU - Kass, Philip H

AU - Puchalski, S. M.

PY - 2012/1

Y1 - 2012/1

N2 - Reasons for performing study: To date, few reports exist comparing magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and computed tomography (CT) for imaging of the equine distal limb, yet clinicians are required to decide which modality to use regularly. Objectives: To report and compare anatomic visualisation scores obtained for CT, contrast enhanced CT (CECT) and standing low-field MRI (LFMRI) in the equine foot. Hypothesis: Anatomic visualisation score discrepancies would exist between CT, CECT and LFMRI. Methods: Images of 22 lame horses (31 limbs) undergoing both CT and LFMRI of the foot were reviewed. When available, CECT images were reviewed. The deep digital flexor tendon (DDFT) was categorised into proximal to distal levels (A-D), structures were assigned visualisation scores (Grades 0-3) and technique comparisons were made using the paired marginal homogeneity test. Results: Computed tomography and LFMRI had similar visibility scores for the navicular bone, middle phalanx, DDFT-B, collateral ligaments of the distal interphalangeal joint and collateral sesamoidean ligament of the navicular bone. The proximal and distal phalanx had lower visibility scores with LFMRI. The distal DDFT (C-D), distal sesamoidean impar ligament and synovial structures had higher scores with LFMRI. Contrast enhanced CT lowered DDFT and collateral sesamoidean ligament scores and raised distal interphalangeal synovium CT visualisation scores. Conclusions and potential relevance: Visualisation scores differ depending on imaging technique and anatomic structure of interest. This information increases our understanding of the limitations of CT, CECT and LFMRI to visualise anatomy in clinical cases.

AB - Reasons for performing study: To date, few reports exist comparing magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and computed tomography (CT) for imaging of the equine distal limb, yet clinicians are required to decide which modality to use regularly. Objectives: To report and compare anatomic visualisation scores obtained for CT, contrast enhanced CT (CECT) and standing low-field MRI (LFMRI) in the equine foot. Hypothesis: Anatomic visualisation score discrepancies would exist between CT, CECT and LFMRI. Methods: Images of 22 lame horses (31 limbs) undergoing both CT and LFMRI of the foot were reviewed. When available, CECT images were reviewed. The deep digital flexor tendon (DDFT) was categorised into proximal to distal levels (A-D), structures were assigned visualisation scores (Grades 0-3) and technique comparisons were made using the paired marginal homogeneity test. Results: Computed tomography and LFMRI had similar visibility scores for the navicular bone, middle phalanx, DDFT-B, collateral ligaments of the distal interphalangeal joint and collateral sesamoidean ligament of the navicular bone. The proximal and distal phalanx had lower visibility scores with LFMRI. The distal DDFT (C-D), distal sesamoidean impar ligament and synovial structures had higher scores with LFMRI. Contrast enhanced CT lowered DDFT and collateral sesamoidean ligament scores and raised distal interphalangeal synovium CT visualisation scores. Conclusions and potential relevance: Visualisation scores differ depending on imaging technique and anatomic structure of interest. This information increases our understanding of the limitations of CT, CECT and LFMRI to visualise anatomy in clinical cases.

KW - Anatomic visualisation

KW - Computed tomography

KW - Contrast enhanced CT

KW - Foot

KW - Horse

KW - Lameness

KW - Magnetic resonance imaging

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=83055181532&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=83055181532&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1111/j.2042-3306.2011.00372.x

DO - 10.1111/j.2042-3306.2011.00372.x

M3 - Article

C2 - 21623900

AN - SCOPUS:83055181532

VL - 44

SP - 51

EP - 56

JO - Equine veterinary journal. Supplement

JF - Equine veterinary journal. Supplement

SN - 2042-3306

IS - 1

ER -