Comparisons of computed tomography, contrast-enhanced computed tomography and standing low-field magnetic resonance imaging in horses with lameness localised to the foot. Part 2: Lesion identification.

摘要: Summary Reasons for performing study: No previous study compares computed tomography (CT), contrast-enhanced (CECT) and standing low-field magnetic resonance imaging (LFMRI) to detect lesions in horses with lameness localised the foot. This will help clinicians understand limitations of these techniques. Objectives: To determine if CT, CECT LFMRI would identify within distal limb document discrepancies lesion distribution classification. Methods: Lesions specific structures identified on CT MR images feet (31 limbs) from same horse were reviewed compared. Distributions compared using a Chi-squared test techniques analysed paired marginal homogeneity concordance. Results: deep digital flexor tendon (DDFT) most common CT/CECT more than LFMRI. Deep seen only frequently proximal extent sesamoid DDFT sesamoid. core (23.3%) or splits (43.3%), whereas abrasions (29.8%), (15.8%), enlargement (15.8%) mineralisation (12.3%). Contrast-enhanced improved identification at insertion resulted sesamoidean impar ligament collateral vascular enhancement 75% cases. Low-field MRI failed soft tissue bone oedema, respectively. Conclusions potential relevance: Multiple are detected but there is variability detection classification. centred podotrochlear apparatus may fail pastern mineralisation. Computed border