Acta veterinaria Scandinavica · 2020
Ultrasonographic documentation of type-3 abomasal ulcer in a cow with left displacement of the abomasum.
Клинический случайСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Gerspach Christian, Oschlies Carina, Kuratli Jasmin, Braun Ueli
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Ultrasonographic documentation of perforated abomasal ulcer has not been published till now. This report describes the clinical, ultrasonographic and postmortem findings in a Jersey cow with type-3 abomasal ulcer and left displacement of the abomasum (LDA).
CASE REPORT: The main clinical findings were abnormal demeanour, rumen atony and tympany, positive foreign body tests, positive auscultation and simultaneous ballottement on the left side, abdominal guarding and loss of negative pressure in the abdominal cavity. The tentative diagnosis was peritonitis and LDA. Abdominal ultrasonography produced images typical of LDA, and in one location between the abdominal wall and abomasum there was a layer of fibrin, a fibrin clot, a break in the abomasal contour, suggestive of a perforated ulcer, and partial obstruction of this gap with fibrin. The diagnosis of perforated abomasal ulcer with subsequent peritonitis was confirmed during postmortem examination.
CONCLUSIONS: The examination of this case shows that under certain circumstances, ultrasonographic imaging of a perforated abomasal ulcer in a cow is possible. Antemortem diagnosis of type-3 abomasal ulcer is preferable to relying on exploratory laparotomy and/or post-mortem examination.
CASE REPORT: The main clinical findings were abnormal demeanour, rumen atony and tympany, positive foreign body tests, positive auscultation and simultaneous ballottement on the left side, abdominal guarding and loss of negative pressure in the abdominal cavity. The tentative diagnosis was peritonitis and LDA. Abdominal ultrasonography produced images typical of LDA, and in one location between the abdominal wall and abomasum there was a layer of fibrin, a fibrin clot, a break in the abomasal contour, suggestive of a perforated ulcer, and partial obstruction of this gap with fibrin. The diagnosis of perforated abomasal ulcer with subsequent peritonitis was confirmed during postmortem examination.
CONCLUSIONS: The examination of this case shows that under certain circumstances, ultrasonographic imaging of a perforated abomasal ulcer in a cow is possible. Antemortem diagnosis of type-3 abomasal ulcer is preferable to relying on exploratory laparotomy and/or post-mortem examination.