Limits...
Diagnostic imaging features of normal anal sacs in dogs and cats

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

ABSTRACT

This study was conducted to provide normal reference features for canine and feline anal sacs using ultrasound, low-field magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and radiograph contrast as diagnostic imaging tools. A total of ten clinically normal beagle dogs and eight clinically normally cats were included. General radiography with contrast, ultrasonography and low-field MRI scans were performed. The visualization of anal sacs, which are located at distinct sites in dogs and cats, is possible with a contrast study on radiography. Most surfaces of the anal sacs tissue, occasionally appearing as a hyperechoic thin line, were surrounded by the hypoechoic external sphincter muscle on ultrasonography. The normal anal sac contents of dogs and cats had variable echogenicity. Signals of anal sac contents on low-field MRI varied in cats and dogs, and contrast medium using T1-weighted images enhanced the anal sac walls more obviously than that on ultrasonography. In conclusion, this study provides the normal features of anal sacs from dogs and cats on diagnostic imaging. Further studies including anal sac evaluation are expected to investigate disease conditions.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus

Ventrodorsal (A, B, D and E) and lateral (C and F) view on radiograph of canine (A–C) and feline (C, D and F) pelvic region. The oval-shaped anal sacs were superimposed over the ischial table region on positive (A) and negative (B and C) contrast study images in dogs. However, the round-shaped anal sacs were observed in the soft tissue of the caudal region of the pelvis on positive (D and F) and negative (E) contrast study images in cats. The anal sac duct was visible as a radiopaque line (F).
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC5037300&req=5

Figure 3: Ventrodorsal (A, B, D and E) and lateral (C and F) view on radiograph of canine (A–C) and feline (C, D and F) pelvic region. The oval-shaped anal sacs were superimposed over the ischial table region on positive (A) and negative (B and C) contrast study images in dogs. However, the round-shaped anal sacs were observed in the soft tissue of the caudal region of the pelvis on positive (D and F) and negative (E) contrast study images in cats. The anal sac duct was visible as a radiopaque line (F).

Mentions: The locations of the anal sacs in dogs were slightly different according to position, but they were usually superimposed over the ischial table region on ventrodorsal views (panels A and B in Fig. 3). Unlike dogs, the anal sacs in cats were observed in soft tissue of the back of the pelvis (panels D and E in Fig. 3). On lateral views, the anal sacs of the dogs were observed at the level of the ischial table in soft tissue dorsal to the pelvis, but the anal sacs in cats were located more caudally (panels C and F in Fig. 3).


Diagnostic imaging features of normal anal sacs in dogs and cats
Ventrodorsal (A, B, D and E) and lateral (C and F) view on radiograph of canine (A–C) and feline (C, D and F) pelvic region. The oval-shaped anal sacs were superimposed over the ischial table region on positive (A) and negative (B and C) contrast study images in dogs. However, the round-shaped anal sacs were observed in the soft tissue of the caudal region of the pelvis on positive (D and F) and negative (E) contrast study images in cats. The anal sac duct was visible as a radiopaque line (F).
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC5037300&req=5

Figure 3: Ventrodorsal (A, B, D and E) and lateral (C and F) view on radiograph of canine (A–C) and feline (C, D and F) pelvic region. The oval-shaped anal sacs were superimposed over the ischial table region on positive (A) and negative (B and C) contrast study images in dogs. However, the round-shaped anal sacs were observed in the soft tissue of the caudal region of the pelvis on positive (D and F) and negative (E) contrast study images in cats. The anal sac duct was visible as a radiopaque line (F).
Mentions: The locations of the anal sacs in dogs were slightly different according to position, but they were usually superimposed over the ischial table region on ventrodorsal views (panels A and B in Fig. 3). Unlike dogs, the anal sacs in cats were observed in soft tissue of the back of the pelvis (panels D and E in Fig. 3). On lateral views, the anal sacs of the dogs were observed at the level of the ischial table in soft tissue dorsal to the pelvis, but the anal sacs in cats were located more caudally (panels C and F in Fig. 3).

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

ABSTRACT

This study was conducted to provide normal reference features for canine and feline anal sacs using ultrasound, low-field magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and radiograph contrast as diagnostic imaging tools. A total of ten clinically normal beagle dogs and eight clinically normally cats were included. General radiography with contrast, ultrasonography and low-field MRI scans were performed. The visualization of anal sacs, which are located at distinct sites in dogs and cats, is possible with a contrast study on radiography. Most surfaces of the anal sacs tissue, occasionally appearing as a hyperechoic thin line, were surrounded by the hypoechoic external sphincter muscle on ultrasonography. The normal anal sac contents of dogs and cats had variable echogenicity. Signals of anal sac contents on low-field MRI varied in cats and dogs, and contrast medium using T1-weighted images enhanced the anal sac walls more obviously than that on ultrasonography. In conclusion, this study provides the normal features of anal sacs from dogs and cats on diagnostic imaging. Further studies including anal sac evaluation are expected to investigate disease conditions.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus