Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42529840›Full record

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

Imaging Characteristics of Pylorogastric, Duodenogastric, and True-Gastrogastric Intussusception in 25 Dogs and One Cat.

Dylan Burton, Linda Dillenbeck, Megan Stadler, Wilfried Mai, Anthony Fischetti, Christine Gremillion, Pablo Espinosa-Mur, Jaime Rechy, Alexandra Gibalski, Kelsey Cline

Abstract readMulticenter StudyObservational Study, Veterinary
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

10 authors.

Dylan BurtonDepartment of Clinical Sciences, College of Veterinary Medicine and Biomedical Sciences, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, Colorado, USA.
Linda DillenbeckDepartment of Environmental and Radiological Health Sciences, College of Veterinary Medicine and Biomedical Sciences, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, Colorado, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4128-8269
Megan StadlerColorado State University Veterinary Teaching Hospital, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, Colorado, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6578-6521
Wilfried MaiDepartment of Clinical Sciences and Advanced Medicine, School of Veterinary Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9147-6079
Anthony FischettiDepartment of Diagnostic Imaging, Schwarzman Animal Medical Center, New York City, New York, USA.
Christine GremillionDepartment of Large Animal Clinical Sciences, College of Veterinary Medicine & Biomedical Sciences, Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8169-3061
Pablo Espinosa-MurVets Choice Radiology LLC, Northbrook, Illinois, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4385-1000
Jaime RechyVEG ER for Pets, White Plains, New York, USA.
Alexandra GibalskiVCA Alameda East Veterinary Hospital, Denver, Colorado, USA.
Kelsey ClineVCA Advanced Veterinary Care Center, Fishers, Indiana, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Gastric intussusception in dogs and cats is uncommon, and there are multiple variations described in the literature. The aim of this study was to describe the imaging characteristics of pylorogastric (PG), duodenogastric (DG), and true-gastrogastric (true-GG) intussusceptions. In this multicenter retrospective study, available medical records and imaging (radiographs, ultrasound [US], and computed tomography [CT]) were evaluated. Group allocation (PG, DG, and true-GG) was based on US/CT findings, or surgical/necropsy findings if only radiographs were available. Available surgical/necropsy follow-up was reported. Twenty-five dogs and one cat (7 weeks-10 years) were included, representing 22 males, four females, and multiple breeds. Twenty-two presented with vomiting. They were diagnosed via US (n = 21), CT (n = 2), or surgery (n = 3). There were 14 PG, 9 true-GG, and 3 DG intussusceptions. A rounded soft tissue opaque mass in the pylorus was present in 8/9 PG and 1/1 DG cases with radiographs. Moderate to marked wall thickening was present in all true-GG and most PG cases on US/CT, predominantly affecting the submucosal layer. Surgical/necropsy follow-up was available in 17 cases diagnosed via imaging and showed spontaneous resolution of five true-GG and one PG intussusception. Two cases classified as PG based on imaging were described as DG at surgery/necropsy. There are some overlapping features of PG and DG intussusceptions on radiographs and US. Moderate to marked submucosal thickening seen with PG and true-GG cases likely represents edema/congestion. Spontaneous resolution of true-GG and PG intussusceptions is possible. US and CT were diagnostic of the type of intussusception in most cases.

Indexed as

Cat DiseasesDog DiseasesDuodenal DiseasesIntussusceptionStomach DiseasesAnimalsCatsDogsFemaleMalePylorusRetrospective StudiesTomography, X-Ray ComputedUltrasonographycomputed tomographyradiographyspontaneous resolutionultrasoundvomiting

Identifiers

PMID42529840
PMCPMC13420225

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.