Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42499198›Full record

ArticleVeterinary radiology & ultrasound : the official journal of the American College of Veterinary Radiology and the International Veterinary Radiology Association2026

CT-Based Reference Ranges for Canine Pyloric Thickness: Influence of Body Size and Normalization With Aortic Diameter.

Jihoon Lee, Danbee Kwon, Sungsoo Kim, Ilyong Yoon, Kichang Lee, Hakyoung Yoon

Abstract readMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in Veterinary radiology & ultrasound : the official journal of the American College of Veterinary Radiology and the International Veterinary Radiology Association, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Jihoon LeeDepartment of Veterinary Medical Imaging, College of Veterinary Medicine, Jeonbuk National University, Iksan-si, Jeollabuk-do, Republic of Korea.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0004-6878-2763
Danbee KwonBundang Leaders Animal Medical Center, Seongnam-si, Gyeonggi-do, Republic of Korea.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8344-4162
Sungsoo KimVIP Animal Medical Center, Seoul, Republic of Korea.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9480-8163
Ilyong YoonNEL Animal Medical Foundation, Anyang-si, Gyeonggi-do, Republic of Korea.
Kichang LeeDepartment of Veterinary Medical Imaging, College of Veterinary Medicine, Jeonbuk National University, Iksan-si, Jeollabuk-do, Republic of Korea.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6961-0849
Hakyoung YoonDepartment of Veterinary Medical Imaging, College of Veterinary Medicine, Jeonbuk National University, Iksan-si, Jeollabuk-do, Republic of Korea.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5051-5331

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Pyloric wall thickness reflects pyloric pathology. Prior related studies included small samples and did not consistently measure perpendicular to the pyloric axis. This multicenter retrospective study established body-weight (BW)-specific computed tomography (CT) reference ranges for pyloric thickness, measured in both cross-sectional and transverse planes, in clinically normal dogs and evaluated relationships with BW, age, breed, and sex. Multiplanar reconstruction (MPR) was used to obtain a true cross-sectional plane, and the transverse plane was used for practicality. CT images of 229 dogs were analyzed to measure pyloric thickness and calculate the pyloric thickness-to-aortic diameter (P/Ao) ratio. Consistent differences were observed between planes. Pyloric thickness showed a positive correlation with BW, with significant differences across BW groups. No significant association was found with age, nor based on neutering status, nor among breeds with similar BW. A minor difference between sexes was observed only in the transverse plane, likely reflecting oblique slicing. In the cross-sectional plane, mean (±standard deviation [SD]) pyloric thickness was 3.61 ± 0.76, 4.21 ± 0.87, 5.10 ± 1.14, and 6.93 ± 1.18 mm for dogs weighing <5, 5-10, 10-20, and ≥20 kg, respectively. In the transverse plane, the corresponding values were 4.03 ± 0.82, 4.80 ± 1.03, 6.02 ± 1.40, and 7.75 ± 1.33 mm. P/Ao ratio was independent of BW, with means (±SD) of 0.74 ± 0.18 and 0.83 ± 0.20 in the cross-sectional and transverse planes, respectively. Therefore, BW-specific reference ranges may be used routinely, whereas the BW-independent P/Ao ratio may facilitate assessment when BW is unavailable.

Indexed as

AortaPylorusTomography, X-Ray ComputedAnimalsBody SizeBody WeightDogsFemaleMaleReference ValuesRetrospective Studiesbody‐weight indexcaninegastrointestinal wallnormal reference rangepyloric measurement

Identifiers

PMID42499198
PMCPMC13400887

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.