Morphometric study of the layers of the canine small intestine at five sampling sites

Sarriá, Ricardo; Latorre, Rafael; Henroteaux, Marc; Henroteaux, N.; Soria, Federico; Pérez-Cuadrado, Enrique; López-Albors, Octavio

doi:10.1016/j.tvjl.2011.06.041

Cited by 14 publications

(18 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Finally, some of the ultrasonographic and histological small intestinal measurements in our study appear abnormally thicker (Table ) in comparison to normal reported values in dogs . The values provided in Table should however not be interpreted on their own, but only as a comparison between the two modalities used to assess intestinal layer correlation (ultrasonography and histology).…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 48%

Ex Vivo Correlation of Ultrasonographic Small Intestinal Wall Layering With Histology in Dogs

A¹,

Granger²,

Wakamatsu³

et al. 2016

Vet Radiology Ultrasound

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Canine ultrasonographic intestinal layers have been reported to correlate with histological layering. However, discrepancies have been reported in people, and additional layers visualized. The aim of this method comparison study was to describe ex vivo canine small intestinal layering and correlate it with histology. Small intestinal samples of 12 adult dogs euthanized for reasons unrelated to gastrointestinal disease were resected immediately following euthanasia, pinned on a Petri dish, and transverse ultrasonographic images acquired in a water bath, using a high-frequency linear transducer. Transverse histological sections were obtained at the same level. Measurements of the intestinal layers were performed on the ultrasonographic and histological images. No significant statistical differences were noted between the ultrasonographic and histological measurements and strong to very strong (r > 0.7) positive correlation was observed for all layers, except for the serosa, which had a low moderate positive correlation (r = 0.479). In addition to the five established layers, a dual mucosal echogenicity was consistently observed, with seven samples presenting an additional inner mucosal severe hyperechogenicity. Histologically, this dual echogenicity was attributed to the intestinal villi (mildly echogenic) and lamina propria (hypoechoic). The additional inner mucosal severe hyperechogenicity observed in seven samples was attributed to mild-to-moderate lacteal dilation histologically. In 4/12 ileal samples, an additional hyperechoic mucosal line was also observed parallel to the submucosa, corresponding histologically to prominent Peyer's patches. Finally, a hyperechoic line was observed within the muscularis of all samples, corresponding histologically to the interface between the muscularis longitudinal and circular layers.

show abstract

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 48%

Ex Vivo Correlation of Ultrasonographic Small Intestinal Wall Layering With Histology in Dogs

A¹,

Granger²,

Wakamatsu³

et al. 2016

Vet Radiology Ultrasound

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Normal canine small intestinal thickness ranges from 2.06 mm to 3.13mm. 39 Although no definitive measurements are diagnostic for IBD, measurements obtained from ultrasound examinations of dogs with IBD have been reported to be >6 mm and >4.7 mm in the duodenum and jejunum, respectively. 40 However, the accuracy of these ultrasono-graphic measurements in surgical patients has not been validated.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Risk Factors for Dehiscence of Stapled Functional End‐to‐End Intestinal Anastomoses in Dogs: 53 Cases (2001–2012)

2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Although objective studies and recommendations regarding optimal endoscopic biopsy of the human gastrointestinal tract have been published, similar data were not readily available for dogs and cats . It could be more difficult to obtain adequate small intestinal mucosal biopsies in dogs than in other species, because the canine duodenal mucosa is thicker . Body weight of dogs does not influence intestinal wall thickness or relative thickness of its layers.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effect of Endoscopic Forceps on Quality of Duodenal Mucosal Biopsy in Healthy Dogs

Goutal-Landry

Mansell

Ryan

et al. 2013

Veterinary Internal Medicne

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Limited data exist regarding influence of endoscopic forceps on duodenal mucosal biopsy quality and adequacy for histologic examination/assessment in dogs.Hypothesis/Objectives: Hypothesizing that larger forceps would procure superior specimens, we evaluated effect of 6 disposable forceps on duodenal biopsy weight, depth, crush artifact, and adequacy for histologic examination/assessment.Animals: Seventeen healthy adult dogs. Methods: Prospective study. Two operators each obtained 4 duodenal specimens from each dog with each forceps. Lightest sample discarded. One pathologist evaluated blindly other 3 specimens. A total of 612 specimens evaluated. Results analyzed by one-way ANOVA of forceps effects with dog as blocking factor. Posthoc pairwise comparisons examined with Tukey's test when indicated.Results: Biopsies performed with large capacity forceps heavier (10.56 AE 0.90 and 11.6 AE 0.62 mg (mean AE SD) versus 5.55 AE 0.53 to 8.61 AE 0.49; P < .0001) and adequacy for histologic examination/assessment superior to standard oval and 'pediatric' (scores 2.52 AE 0.41 and 2.58 AE 0.37 versus 2.08 AE 0.33 and 2.14 AE 0.29; P < .0001). No statistically significant difference in depth scores. Large capacity forceps with spike associated with less crush artifact than all smaller forceps (scores 1.19 AE 0.16 versus 1.38 AE 0.21 to 1.52 AE 0.21; P < .0001). In same size forceps, presence of spike had no effect on crush artifact and adequacy for histologic examination/assessment (P < .0001).Conclusions and Clinical Importance: Large capacity forceps are superior, providing higher quality and greater numbers of samples achieving adequacy for histologic examination/assessment. Choice of endoscopic biopsy forceps for duodenal samples influences sample volume and diagnostic utility.

show abstract

Morphometric study of the layers of the canine small intestine at five sampling sites

Cited by 14 publications

References 12 publications

Ex Vivo Correlation of Ultrasonographic Small Intestinal Wall Layering With Histology in Dogs

Ex Vivo Correlation of Ultrasonographic Small Intestinal Wall Layering With Histology in Dogs

Risk Factors for Dehiscence of Stapled Functional End‐to‐End Intestinal Anastomoses in Dogs: 53 Cases (2001–2012)

Effect of Endoscopic Forceps on Quality of Duodenal Mucosal Biopsy in Healthy Dogs

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About