Page 94 - Atlas of Small Animal CT and MRI
P. 94

84  Atlas of Small Animal CT and MRI


              Figure 1.5.20  Feline Restrictive Orbital Myofibroblastic Sarcoma (Feline)                  MR





















             (a) T1, TP                       (b) T2, TP                       (c) ST, TP




















             (d) T1+C+FS, DP                  (e) T1+C+FS, DP                  (f) T1+C+FS, TP
             16y FS Siamese with bilateral conjunctival and episcleral hyperemia, corneal ulcerations, and reduced extraocular muscle function.
             Images a–d are at the same anatomic level. Image e is somewhat more ventral and highlights the caudoventral recesses of the orbits.
             There is pronounced thickening of the sclera and episcleral tissues, which is best seen on the contrast‐enhanced images (d–f: arrows).
             Periorbital edema is also evident on the STIR image (c: arrows). There is a loss of thickening of the extraocular muscles and loss of muscle
             margin definition associated with retrobulbar contrast enhancement (e: arrowheads). Biopsy confirmed a diagnosis of restrictive orbital
                                                              16
             myofibroblastic sarcoma involving both orbits. Thomasy et al (2013).  Reproduced with permission from Wiley.


             References                                         6.  Boroffka SAEB, Görig C, Auriemma E, Passon­Vastenburg
                                                                   MHAC, Voorhout G, Barthez PY. Magnetic resonance imaging of
             1.  Joslyn S, Richards S, Boroffka S, Mitchell M, Hammond G, Sullivan M.   the canine optic nerve. Vet Radiol Ultrasound. 2008;49:540–544.
               Magnetic resonance imaging contrast enhancement of extra­   7.  Morgan RV, Daniel GB, Donnell RL. Magnetic resonance imag­
               ocular muscles in dogs with no clinical evidence of orbital disease.   ing of the normal eye and orbit of the dog and cat. Vet Radiol
               Vet Radiol Ultrasound. 2013;55:63–67.               Ultrasound. 1994;35:102–108.
             2.  Noller C, Henninger W, Gronemeyer DH, Hirschberg RM, Budras   8.  Schlueter C, Budras KD, Ludewig E, Mayrhofer E, Koenig HE,
               KD. Computed tomography­anatomy of the normal feline nasolac­  Walter A, et al. Brachycephalic feline noses: CT and anatomical
               rimal drainage system. Vet Radiol Ultrasound. 2006;47:53–60.  study of the relationship between head conformation and the
             3.  Nykamp SG, Scrivani PV, Pease AP. Computed tomography dacry­  nasolacrimal drainage system. J Feline Med Surg. 2009;11:
               ocystography evaluation of the nasolacrimal apparatus. Vet Radiol   891–900.
               Ultrasound. 2004;45:23–28.                       9.  Hamilton HL, Whitley RD, McLaughlin SA. Exophthalmos
             4.  Couturier L, Degueurce C, Ruel Y, Dennis R, Begon D. Anatomical     secondary to aspergillosis in a cat. J Am Anim Hosp Assoc.
               study of cranial nerve emergence and skull foramina in the dog   2000;36:343–347.
               using magnetic resonance imaging and computed tomography.   10.  Kneissl S, Konar M, Fuchs­Baumgartinger A, Nell B. Magnetic
               Vet Radiol Ultrasound. 2005;46:375–383.             resonance imaging features of orbital inflammation with intrac­
             5.  Murphy CJ, Samuelson DA, Pollock RV. The Eye. Miller’s Anatomy   ranial extension in four dogs. Vet Radiol Ultrasound.
               of the Dog: W.B. Saunders Company, 2012;746–785.    2007;48:403–408.
            84
   89   90   91   92   93   94   95   96   97   98   99