ArticleFrontiers in veterinary science2025
Ultrasound- and fluoroscopic-guided, percutaneous cholecystostomy drain placement in canine cadavers, a feasibility and safety study.
Article in Frontiers in veterinary science, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To evaluate the feasibility and safety of placing cholecystostomy drains percutaneously under ultrasound and fluoroscopy guidance. Study design: Experimental cadaveric study. Animals: Ten canine cadavers. Methods: Placement of two different locking loop drain systems was tested, an 8F pediatric-nephrostomy (Boston Scientific PNPAS) and a 6.5F SUB-nephrostomy (Norfolk Vet Products). The drains were placed into the gallbladders using a Seldinger-technique under ultrasound and fluoroscopic guidance. After placement, CT-scans were performed to assess drain position, leakage and organ injuries. Anatomic examination was performed to identify and grade iatrogenic injury to the abdominal and thoracic organs. Leak pressures were measured using a water manometer. Procedure time, volume injected and pressure measurements before and at the time of leakage were recorded. Results: Drain placement into the gallbladder was confirmed by ultrasound and fluoroscopy in 5/5 pediatric-nephrostomy and 0/5 SUB-nephrostomy drains. Mean placement time was 10 min (range 7-12 min) for pediatric-nephrostomy drains. CT-scans confirmed drain placement in 4/5 pediatric-nephrostomy drains, one drain had dislodged. Free abdominal contrast was observed in 4/5 dogs with pediatric-nephrostomy. Drains were placed through the 5th to 10th intercostal space. Anatomic examination showed perforation of the pleural cavity (3/10) for drains placed through the 5th, 7th, and 10th intercostal spaces. Drains passed through the liver parenchyma in the same three dogs. The remaining seven dogs had no organ damage. Pressure testing was performed in the pediatric-nephrostomy drains (4/5). Leakage occurred at a pressure of 4, 9, 12 and 18 cm H Conclusion: Percutaneous cholecystostomy drain placement is feasible in dogs depending on the drain and technique. Risk of pleural space injury must be considered when performing this method. Further studies are needed to establish a safe, standardized percutaneous cholecystostomy technique. Clinical significance: Imaging-guided, percutaneous cholecystostomy drain placement with the tested method is feasible depending on the drain type. Safety concerns must be addressed prior to clinical application.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.