Objectives To estimate the sensitivity and specificity of ultrasound and CT for localising solitary hepatic masses to particular liver divisions. Materials and Methods Dogs diagnosed with a solitary liver mass by ultrasound and/or CT, with surgical or necropsy confirmation within 1 month of imaging. Ultrasound reports were reviewed for mass location. CT scans were reviewed by two radiologists and mass location was determined by consensus agreement. Sensitivity and specificity were calculated for ultrasound and CT for each liver division. Results Fourteen of 71 dogs had CT only, 27 of 71 had ultrasound only and 30 of 71 had both. Location was correctly predicted in 42 of 57 dogs (74%) by ultrasound and in 37 of 44 dogs (84%) by CT. Both CT and ultrasound had high specificity for localising masses in all divisions. Sensitivity varied among divisions and was highest for left division masses. Clinical Significance The results suggest that either imaging modality is appropriate for presurgical planning. Prospective studies are recommended to help identify additional factors that may aid in determination of hepatic mass location.

Ultrasound phantoms are training tools that can help students learn basic ultrasound principles. The purpose of this prospective cohort design study was to determine whether preclinical veterinary students in a curriculum with more phantom training sessions acquire better-quality ultrasound images of kidneys in live canines compared with students in a curriculum without sequential phantom training sessions. In clinical skills labs, 132 second-year (2VM) and 130 third-year (3VM) veterinary students obtained sagittal and transverse images of the left kidney of healthy, student-owned dogs. Images were graded on proper identification/orientation, technique, and image anatomy using a modified Brightness Mode Quality Ultrasound Imaging Examination Technique, a modified standardized ultrasound interpretation scale. A two-sample ttest was used to compare 2VM and 3VM performance. 2VM students were inaugural members of a redesigned curriculum and had previously participated in eight clinical skills labs involving hands-on ultrasound practice using phantoms and live animals prior to this study. The 3VM students were the final members of the prior curriculum and had previously participated in a single ultrasound lab using phantoms and a single ultrasound lab using live animals. For Identification/Orientation categories, 2VM students acquired slightly but statistically significantly better transverse images (P = 0.04). There were no significant differences between identification/orientation tasks for sagittal images or for technique and image anatomy categories. The findings indicate that future studies assessing more sensitive evaluation tools and serial evaluation of students may be beneficial in monitoring student competency and assist in evaluating the role of phantoms in ultrasound training in the veterinary curriculum.