 |
|
|
|
Year 2010 - Volume 30, Number 1
|
|
Evaluation of hepatic biopsy techniques in sheep, 30(1):29-36
|
ABSTRACT.- Néspoli P.B., Gheller V.A., Peixoto P.V., França T.N., Carvalho A.U., Godoy de Araújo D.K. & Malm C. 2010. [Evaluation of hepatic biopsy techniques in sheep.] Avaliação de técnicas de biópsia hepática em ovinos. Pesquisa Veterinária Brasileira 30(1):29-36. Departamento de Clínica Médica Veterinária, Universidade Federal de Mato Grosso, Av. Fernando Corrêa da Costa s/n, Coxipó, Cuiabá, MT 78060-900, Brazil. E-mail: nespoli@ufmt.br
Due to lack of information about the subject and lack of studies that confront the techniques of liver biopsy in sheep, a comparative study between eight biopsy techniques in this species was developed. In this study, eight crossbred (Santa Inês) ewe lambs (17.95 kg ± 2.71) were used in serial procedures for eight consecutive weeks. Liver samples obtained through six percutaneous techniques and two videolaparoscopic techniques were analyzed. The clinical aspects, clinical pathological findings, hepatic sample weights, histology quality, number of centrilobular veins and portal spaces, and the presence of artifacts in the histology slices were recorded. For the percutaneous techniques, two types of needles were used, modified Menghini (M) and semi-automatic tru-cut (T). They were used in combinations with blind biopsies, guided by ultrasound (US) and monitored by video laparoscopy (VL) biopsies. In the videolaparoscopy procedures, Blakesley biopsy forceps and the method of liver fragment resection by VL were used. No relevant hematological or biochemical alterations were found and the clinical manifestations were slight and transitory. In a general way, the use of US and VL in percutaneous biopsies did not yield a significant improvement in weight and histology quality of the liver samples; however, the videolaparoscopic techniques allowed a wider access to the liver than the percutaneous techniques. The quality of the samples obtained through both VL techniques were equivalent; however, the resection technique enabled the collection of heavier samples, but determined the formation of perihepatic adherences. More difficulty in fragment retrieval, more fluctuation in weight and less quality were found in samples obtained with M needles when compared to T needles. |
| |
|
|
| |
|
|
