Abstract：
OBJECTIVE: To provide veterinarians with updated radiographic descriptions of select radiolucent foreign material in a simulated gastrointestinal environment.
METHODS: 368 veterinarian respondents from the US.
METHODS: An online survey was administered between June 18, 2023, and July 2, 2023, through a private veterinarian-based social media group. Representative commonly ingested foreign bodies were radiographed surrounded by air and water to simulate being within the gastrointestinal tract. Two examiners evaluated and qualified the opacity of the objects for each environment.
RESULTS: The private social media group had a total of 3,900 members including veterinarians from all disciplines. A total of 362 small animal veterinarians (9.3% of the group) responded to the study reporting a total of 123 foreign objects that were not causing mechanical obstruction at the time of initial presentation. Sixty-eight foreign bodies were reported greater than or equal to 5 times and grouped as balls (n = 4), food (9), fabric (14), wood (3), soft plastic (14), hard plastic (18), or other (6). Most (98.5% [67/68]) objects were easily identifiable in air. In water, 23.5% (16/68) of the objects were obscured, and 39.7% (27/68) had inversion of the major opacity when compared to the opacity in air.
CONCLUSIONS: The opacity of some ingested radiolucent material can invert relative to air or fluid, which may reflect substantial differences in detection following repositioning. When known dietary indiscretion occurs, radiographing a sample of the material in air and water will improve the accuracy of assessment.
METHODS: 368 veterinarian respondents from the US.
METHODS: An online survey was administered between June 18, 2023, and July 2, 2023, through a private veterinarian-based social media group. Representative commonly ingested foreign bodies were radiographed surrounded by air and water to simulate being within the gastrointestinal tract. Two examiners evaluated and qualified the opacity of the objects for each environment.
RESULTS: The private social media group had a total of 3,900 members including veterinarians from all disciplines. A total of 362 small animal veterinarians (9.3% of the group) responded to the study reporting a total of 123 foreign objects that were not causing mechanical obstruction at the time of initial presentation. Sixty-eight foreign bodies were reported greater than or equal to 5 times and grouped as balls (n = 4), food (9), fabric (14), wood (3), soft plastic (14), hard plastic (18), or other (6). Most (98.5% [67/68]) objects were easily identifiable in air. In water, 23.5% (16/68) of the objects were obscured, and 39.7% (27/68) had inversion of the major opacity when compared to the opacity in air.
CONCLUSIONS: The opacity of some ingested radiolucent material can invert relative to air or fluid, which may reflect substantial differences in detection following repositioning. When known dietary indiscretion occurs, radiographing a sample of the material in air and water will improve the accuracy of assessment.
摘要：
目的：为兽医提供在模拟胃肠道环境中选择的射线可透过异物的最新影像学描述。
方法：来自美国的368名兽医受访者。
方法：在2023年6月18日至2023年7月2日之间通过私人兽医社交媒体组织进行了一项在线调查。通常摄入的代表性异物被空气和水包围，以模拟在胃肠道内。两名审查员对每个环境的对象的不透明度进行了评估和鉴定。
结果：私人社交媒体小组共有3,900名成员，其中包括来自各个学科的兽医。共有362名小动物兽医（占该组的9.3％）对研究做出了回应，报告了总共123个异物，这些异物在初次就诊时并未引起机械阻塞。据报道，有68个异物大于或等于5次，并分组为球（n=4），食物(9)织物（14），木材(3),软塑料(14),硬质塑料(18),或其他（6）。大多数（98.5%[67/68]）物体在空气中很容易识别。在水中,23.5%(16/68)的物体被遮挡，与空气中的不透明度相比，39.7％（27/68）的主要不透明度反转。
结论：某些摄入的射线可透材料的不透明度可以相对于空气或流体反转，这可能反映了重新定位后检测的实质性差异。当已知的饮食不当发生时，对空气和水中的材料样本进行射线照相将提高评估的准确性。
方法：来自美国的368名兽医受访者。
方法：在2023年6月18日至2023年7月2日之间通过私人兽医社交媒体组织进行了一项在线调查。通常摄入的代表性异物被空气和水包围，以模拟在胃肠道内。两名审查员对每个环境的对象的不透明度进行了评估和鉴定。
结果：私人社交媒体小组共有3,900名成员，其中包括来自各个学科的兽医。共有362名小动物兽医（占该组的9.3％）对研究做出了回应，报告了总共123个异物，这些异物在初次就诊时并未引起机械阻塞。据报道，有68个异物大于或等于5次，并分组为球（n=4），食物(9)织物（14），木材(3),软塑料(14),硬质塑料(18),或其他（6）。大多数（98.5%[67/68]）物体在空气中很容易识别。在水中,23.5%(16/68)的物体被遮挡，与空气中的不透明度相比，39.7％（27/68）的主要不透明度反转。
结论：某些摄入的射线可透材料的不透明度可以相对于空气或流体反转，这可能反映了重新定位后检测的实质性差异。当已知的饮食不当发生时，对空气和水中的材料样本进行射线照相将提高评估的准确性。
