FREE SHIPPING over $40
OVER 9000 FIVE-STAR REVIEWS
5% OFF ALL SUBSCRIPTIONS
100% HAPPINESS GUARANTEE
Analyze Diet
0
Home / Equine Research Bank / Animals (Basel) / Comparison of Ultrasound and Magnetic Resonance Imaging for ...
Animals : an open access journal from MDPI2023; 13(14); doi: 10.3390/ani13142328

Comparison of Ultrasound and Magnetic Resonance Imaging for Identifying Soft Tissue Abnormalities in the Palmar Aspect of the Equine Digit.

Abstract: Damage to the soft tissue structures of the digit is a common source of equine lameness. While magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) allows for the most complete diagnostic imaging of the equine digit, ultrasound is more readily available and less expensive. This prospective diagnostic accuracy study compares ultrasound to MRI for the diagnosis of injuries visible with ultrasound within the digit, including the deep digital flexor tendon (DDFT), collateral sesamoidean ligament (CSL), and navicular bursa. Clinical patients underwent an MRI of the digit and a blinded ultrasound of the digit between the heel bulbs, and results of the two modalities were compared. A total of 70 ultrasound and MRI exams of 45 horses were included. Ultrasound had good sensitivity (85%), moderate specificity (60%), and accuracy of 70% for evaluating the dorsal tearing of the DDFT. Accuracy was lower for navicular bursa effusion (67%), navicular bursa proliferation (61%), and CSL enlargement (61%). Tearing of the DDFT distal to the navicular bone was identified with MRI in 27 limbs, 20 of which also had dorsal damage proximal to the navicular bone identified with ultrasound. Ultrasound evaluation remains a useful screening tool, particularly for the assessment of DDFT tearing proximal to the navicular bone but risks under-diagnosing pathology to the navicular bursa and CSL. Clinically significant concurrent damage to the distal DDFT and other osseous and soft tissues in the hoof capsule is unlikely to be identified without MRI.
Get Full Text
Publication Date: 2023-07-17 PubMed ID: 37508105PubMed Central: PMC10376038DOI: 10.3390/ani13142328Google Scholar: Lookup
The Equine Research Bank provides access to a large database of publicly available scientific literature. Inclusion in the Research Bank does not imply endorsement of study methods or findings by Mad Barn.
LinkedInCopy
  • Journal Article

Summary

This research summary has been generated with artificial intelligence and may contain errors and omissions. Refer to the original study to confirm details provided. Submit correction.

The study presents a comparison of ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in diagnosing soft tissue abnormalities in horses’ digits. The aim is to determine the effectiveness of ultrasound, particularly as it’s more affordable and readily available than MRI. The research illustrates that ultrasound is a potentially useful screening tool, but it has its limitations, especially compared to MRI.

Methods Used in the Research

  • 70 ultrasound and MRI examinations were conducted on 45 horses to identify damages on the deep digital flexor tendon (DDFT), collateral sesamoidean ligament (CSL), and navicular bursa.
  • Clinical patients underwent a blinded ultrasound of the digit between the heel bulbs and an MRI of the digit.
  • The results obtained from the MRI and ultrasound procedures were then compared.

Findings of the Research

  • Ultrasound had favorable sensitivity (85%) but moderate specificity (60%) for all recognized cases of dorsal tearing of the DDFT.
  • The accuracy of the ultrasound was lower for navicular bursa effusion (67%), navicular bursa proliferation (61%), and CSL enlargement (61%).
  • In 27 limbs, MRI identified tearing of the DDFT distal to the navicular bone. Of these, ultrasound identified dorsal damage proximal to the navicular bone in 20 limbs.

Conclusion of the Research

  • Despite its limitations, ultrasound remains a useful screening tool, specifically for assessing DDFT tearings proximal to the navicular bone.
  • However, ultrasound risks under-diagnosing the pathology of the navicular bursa and CSL.
  • The study showed that it is unlikely to identify significant concurrent damage to the distal DDFT and other osseous and soft tissues in the hoof capsule without MRI.

Therefore, while ultrasound can be beneficial for initial screenings due to its affordability and accessibility, MRI provides a more comprehensive diagnostic imaging for soft tissue abnormalities in the equine digit.

Cite This Article

APA
Barrett MF, Goorchenko GE, Frisbie DD. (2023). Comparison of Ultrasound and Magnetic Resonance Imaging for Identifying Soft Tissue Abnormalities in the Palmar Aspect of the Equine Digit. Animals (Basel), 13(14). https://doi.org/10.3390/ani13142328

Publication

Animals : an open access journal from MDPI
ISSN: 2076-2615
NlmUniqueID: 101635614
Country: Switzerland
Language: English
Volume: 13
Issue: 14

Researcher Affiliations

Barrett, Myra F
  • Department of Environmental and Radiological Health Sciences, College of Veterinary Medicine and Biomedical Sciences, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO 80523, USA.
Goorchenko, Georgette E
  • Great & Small Veterinary Imaging, Inc., 1437 Moreno St, Oceanside, CA 92054, USA.
Frisbie, David D
  • Department of Clinical Sciences, College of Veterinary Medicine and Biomedical Sciences, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO 80523, USA.

Conflict of Interest Statement

The authors have no conflict of interest.

References

This article includes 32 references
  1. Bolen G, Busoni V, Jacqmot O, Snaps F. Sonographic anatomy of the palmarodistal aspect of the equine digit.. Vet Radiol Ultrasound 2007 May-Jun;48(3):270-5.
    doi: 10.1111/j.1740-8261.2007.00241.xpubmed: 17508516google scholar: lookup
  2. Kristoffersen M, Thoefner MB. Ultrasonography of the navicular region in horses.. Equine Vet. Educ. 2003;15:150–157.
    doi: 10.1111/j.2042-3292.2003.tb00234.xgoogle scholar: lookup
  3. Sage AM, Turner TA. Ultrasonography of the soft tissue structures of the equine digit.. Equine Vet. Educ. 2002;14:221–224.
    doi: 10.1111/j.2042-3292.2002.tb00175.xgoogle scholar: lookup
  4. Whitcomb MB. How to perform a complete ultrasonographic evaluation of the pastern. Proceedings of the AAEP Annual Convention; Seattle, WA, USA. 7 December 2005; Lexington, KY, USA: American Association of Equine Practitioners; 2005. pp. 465–472.
  5. Whitcomb MB. Ultrasonographic appearance and distribution of deep digital flexor injuries in the pastern region.. Proc. Am. Assoc. Equine Pract. 2008;54:452–454.
  6. Whitcomb MB. Ultrasonographic evaluation of the distal extremity.. J. Equine Vet. Sci. 2009;29:47–59.
    doi: 10.1016/j.jevs.2008.11.010google scholar: lookup
  7. Hauser ML, Rantenen NW, Modransky PD. Ultrasound examination of distal interphalangeal joint, navicular bursa, navicular bone and deep digital flexor tendon.. Equine Vet. Sci. 1982;2:95–97.
    doi: 10.1016/S0737-0806(82)80012-9google scholar: lookup
  8. Dyson S, Marks D. Foot pain and the elusive diagnosis.. Vet Clin North Am Equine Pract 2003 Aug;19(2):531-65, viii.
    doi: 10.1016/S0749-0739(03)00004-Xpubmed: 14575173google scholar: lookup
  9. Busoni V, Snaps F, Trenteseaux J, Dondelinger RF. Magnetic resonance imaging of the palmar aspect of the equine podotrochlear apparatus: normal appearance.. Vet Radiol Ultrasound 2004 May-Jun;45(3):198-204.
    doi: 10.1111/j.1740-8261.2004.04033.xpubmed: 15200255google scholar: lookup
  10. Kleiter M, Kneissl S, Stanek C, Mayrhofer E, Baulain U, Deegen E. Evaluation of magnetic resonance imaging techniques in the equine digit.. Vet Radiol Ultrasound 1999 Jan-Feb;40(1):15-22.
    doi: 10.1111/j.1740-8261.1999.tb01833.xpubmed: 10023990google scholar: lookup
  11. Park RD, Nelson TR, Hoopes PJ. Magnetic resonance imaging of the normal equine digit and metacarpophalangeal joint.. Vet. Radiol. 1987;28:105–116.
    doi: 10.1111/j.1740-8261.1987.tb00036.xgoogle scholar: lookup
  12. Murray RC, Dyson SJ, Schramme MC, Branch M, Woods S. Magnetic resonance imaging of the equine digit with chronic laminitis.. Vet Radiol Ultrasound 2003 Nov-Dec;44(6):609-17.
    pubmed: 14703239doi: 10.1111/j.1740-8261.2003.tb00519.xgoogle scholar: lookup
  13. Busoni V, Heimann M, Trenteseaux J, Snaps F, Dondelinger RF. Magnetic resonance imaging findings in the equine deep digital flexor tendon and distal sesamoid bone in advanced navicular disease--an ex vivo study.. Vet Radiol Ultrasound 2005 Jul-Aug;46(4):279-86.
    doi: 10.1111/j.1740-8261.2005.00051.xpubmed: 16229425google scholar: lookup
  14. Werpy NM. Recheck magnetic resonance imaging examinations for evaluation of musculoskeletal injury.. Vet Clin North Am Equine Pract 2012 Dec;28(3):659-80.
    doi: 10.1016/j.cveq.2012.09.003pubmed: 23177138google scholar: lookup
  15. Vanel M, Olive J, Gold S, Mitchell RD, Walker L. Clinical significance and prognosis of deep digital flexor tendinopathy assessed over time using MRI.. Vet Radiol Ultrasound 2012 Nov-Dec;53(6):621-7.
    doi: 10.1111/j.1740-8261.2012.01961.xpubmed: 22741926google scholar: lookup
  16. Blunden A, Murray R, Dyson S. Lesions of the deep digital flexor tendon in the digit: a correlative MRI and post mortem study in control and lame horses.. Equine Vet J 2009 Jan;41(1):25-33.
    doi: 10.2746/042516408X343028pubmed: 19301578google scholar: lookup
  17. Murray RC, Schramme MC, Dyson SJ, Branch MV, Blunden TS. Magnetic resonance imaging characteristics of the foot in horses with palmar foot pain and control horses.. Vet Radiol Ultrasound 2006 Jan-Feb;47(1):1-16.
    doi: 10.1111/j.1740-8261.2005.00100.xpubmed: 16429980google scholar: lookup
  18. Murray RC, Blunden TS, Schramme MC, Dyson SJ. How does magnetic resonance imaging represent histologic findings in the equine digit?. Vet Radiol Ultrasound 2006 Jan-Feb;47(1):17-31.
    doi: 10.1111/j.1740-8261.2005.00101.xpubmed: 16429981google scholar: lookup
  19. Murray RC, Mair TS, Sherlock CE, Blunden AS. Comparison of high-field and low-field magnetic resonance images of cadaver limbs of horses.. Vet Rec 2009 Sep 5;165(10):281-8.
    doi: 10.1136/vr.165.10.281pubmed: 19734560google scholar: lookup
  20. Dyson S, Murray R, Schramme M, Branch M. Magnetic resonance imaging of the equine foot: 15 horses.. Equine Vet J 2003 Jan;35(1):18-26.
    doi: 10.2746/042516403775467531pubmed: 12553458google scholar: lookup
  21. Dyson SJ, Murray R, Schramme MC. Lameness associated with foot pain: results of magnetic resonance imaging in 199 horses (January 2001--December 2003) and response to treatment.. Equine Vet J 2005 Mar;37(2):113-21.
    doi: 10.2746/0425164054223804pubmed: 15779622google scholar: lookup
  22. Dyson S, Murray R. Magnetic resonance imaging evaluation of 264 horses with foot pain: the podotrochlear apparatus, deep digital flexor tendon and collateral ligaments of the distal interphalangeal joint.. Equine Vet J 2007 Jul;39(4):340-3.
    doi: 10.2746/042516407X185566pubmed: 17722726google scholar: lookup
  23. Sampson SN, Schneider RK, Gavin PR, Ho CP, Tucker RL, Charles EM. Magnetic resonance imaging findings in horses with recent onset navicular syndrome but without radiographic abnormalities.. Vet Radiol Ultrasound 2009 Jul-Aug;50(4):339-46.
    doi: 10.1111/j.1740-8261.2009.01547.xpubmed: 19697596google scholar: lookup
  24. Schramme MC, Murray RC, Blunden AS, Dyson SJ. A comparison between magnetic resonance imaging, pathology, and radiology in 34 limbs with navicular syndrome and 25 control limbs. Proceedings of the 51st Annual Convention of the American Association of Equine Practitioners; Seattle, WA, USA. 3–7 December 2005; Lexington, KY, USA: American Association of Equine Practitioners; pp. 348–358.
  25. Bell CD, Howard RD, Taylor DS, Voss ED, Werpy NM. Outcomes of podotrochlear (navicular) bursa injections for signs of foot pain in horses evaluated via magnetic resonance imaging: 23 cases (2005-2007).. J Am Vet Med Assoc 2009 Apr 1;234(7):920-5.
    doi: 10.2460/javma.234.7.920pubmed: 19335243google scholar: lookup
  26. Dyson S, Pool R, Blunden T, Murray R. The distal sesamoidean impar ligament: comparison between its appearance on magnetic resonance imaging and histology of the axial third of the ligament.. Equine Vet J 2010 May;42(4):332-9.
    doi: 10.1111/j.2042-3306.2010.00068.xpubmed: 20525052google scholar: lookup
  27. Holowinski ME, Solano M, Maranda L, García-López JM. Magnetic resonance imaging of navicular bursa adhesions.. Vet Radiol Ultrasound 2012 Sep-Oct;53(5):566-72.
    doi: 10.1111/j.1740-8261.2012.01954.xpubmed: 22731965google scholar: lookup
  28. Grewal JS, McClure SR, Booth LC, Evans RB, Caston SS. Assessment of the ultrasonographic characteristics of the podotrochlear apparatus in clinically normal horses and horses with navicular syndrome.. J Am Vet Med Assoc 2004 Dec 15;225(12):1881-8.
    doi: 10.2460/javma.2004.225.1881pubmed: 15643838google scholar: lookup
  29. Evrard L, Joostens Z, Vandersmissen M, Audigié F, Busoni V. Comparison Between Ultrasonographic and Standing Magnetic Resonance Imaging Findings in the Podotrochlear Apparatus of Horses With Foot Pain.. Front Vet Sci 2021;8:675180.
    pmc: PMC8287171pubmed: 34291100doi: 10.3389/fvets.2021.675180google scholar: lookup
  30. Acutt EV, Contino EK, Frisbie DD, Barrett MF. Deep digital flexor tendon lesions in the pastern are associated with the presence of distal tendinopathy.. Equine Vet J 2022 May;54(3):502-512.
    doi: 10.1111/evj.13470pubmed: 34050982google scholar: lookup
  31. Evrard L, Bolen G, Maquet N, Busoni V. Ultrasonography of the collateral ligaments of the distal interphalangeal joint in horses: Technique and reference images.. J. Equine Vet. Sci. 2012;32:584–589.
    doi: 10.1016/j.jevs.2012.02.003google scholar: lookup
  32. Lacitignola L, Rossella S, Pasquale L, Crovace A. Power Doppler to investigate superficial digital flexor tendinopathy in the horse.. Open Vet J 2020 Jan;9(4):317-321.
    doi: 10.4314/ovj.v9i4.7pmc: PMC6971361pubmed: 32042652google scholar: lookup

Citations

This article has been cited 2 times.
  1. Scharf A, Acutt E, Bills K, Werpy N. Magnetic resonance imaging for diagnosing and managing deep digital flexor tendinopathy in equine athletes: Insights, advances and future directions. Equine Vet J 2025 Sep;57(5):1183-1203.
    doi: 10.1111/evj.14508pubmed: 40314097google scholar: lookup
  2. Reis IL, Lopes B, Sousa P, Sousa AC, Caseiro AR, Mendonça CM, Santos JM, Atayde LM, Alvites RD, Maurício AC. Equine Musculoskeletal Pathologies: Clinical Approaches and Therapeutical Perspectives-A Review. Vet Sci 2024 Apr 26;11(5).
    doi: 10.3390/vetsci11050190pubmed: 38787162google scholar: lookup
Subscribe to our newsletter
Join 99,344 horse owners like you who receive our email updates on horse health and nutrition.