JVD 2009 1 Bar-Am Y, Pollard RE, Kass PH,Verstraete FJ The diagnostic yield of conventional radiographs and computed tomography in dogs and cats with maxillofacial trauma Flashcards Preview

Kirsty's JVD > JVD 2009 1 Bar-Am Y, Pollard RE, Kass PH,Verstraete FJ The diagnostic yield of conventional radiographs and computed tomography in dogs and cats with maxillofacial trauma > Flashcards

Flashcards in JVD 2009 1 Bar-Am Y, Pollard RE, Kass PH,Verstraete FJ The diagnostic yield of conventional radiographs and computed tomography in dogs and cats with maxillofacial trauma Deck (6)
Loading flashcards...
1
Q

What was the aim of the study?

A

To compare the diagnostic yield of conventional radiographs and computed tomography images of skulls of dogs and cats with maxillofacial trauma

2
Q

What percentage of fractures in cats are mandibular fractures and what percentage of fractures in dogs are mandibular and maxillary fractures?

A
  1. 3- 23.1% of fractures in cats are mandibular

1. 5 - 6% of fractures in dogs are mandibular and <1% of fractures are maxillary.

3
Q

What 4 radiographic projections were compared to the CT images in this study?

A

dorsoventral (DV)
laterolateral (LL)
left and right lateral-oblique (OBL)

4
Q

How were the radiographs and the ct’s compared?

A

26 predefined clinically relevant anatomical features of the skull were individually evaluated in each study.

5
Q

What semi-quantitative scoring system was applied to the studies?

A
Scoring 0-3 was defined as
0= inability to identify the anatomic feature
1 = difficult to identify
2 = easy to identify
3 = very easy to identify
6
Q

How was maxillofacial trauma evaluated?

A

Each radiograph and ct was evaluated for the presence of any one of 27 predetermined potential traumatic injuries.
The case was scored as 1 if the finding was present t and 0 if it was not and results were then reported as a percentage of cases in which the finding was identified.

Decks in Kirsty's JVD Class (26):