The Site of Origin of Canine Abdominal Masses Correlates with the Risk of Malignancy: Retrospective Study of 123 Cases.

Paola Valenti,Valeria Pellegrino,Luisa Vera Muscatello,Gian Marco Gerboni,Giancarlo Avallone,Monica Alberti,Elisa Zambon,Barbara Brunetti

doi:10.3390/ani11040962

Paola Valenti, Valeria Pellegrino + Show 6 more

Open Access

https://doi.org/10.3390/ani11040962

Copy DOI

Abstract

Simple SummaryThe detection of abdominal masses in dogs is a common finding in clinical practice. While data regarding masses in specific abdominal organs are available in the literature, studies comparing the site distribution of benign versus malignant lesions are scarce. The aim of this study was to retrospectively describe the tissue distribution and diagnosis of surgically excised abdominal masses in a canine population. A total of 123 abdominal masses were classified based on the organ of origin and histologically classified as non-neoplastic (39), benign neoplasia (15), and malignant neoplasia (69). Gastrointestinal masses were more likely to be malignant than masses in other sites. The masses not associated with any organ were significantly larger than the genital and splenic lesions, and no association between size and malignancy was found. This case series suggests that, while the size of the lesion cannot be used as a parameter to predict the probability of a mass being malignant neoplasm, the gastrointestinal site may be used for this scope, providing useful information for primary care clinicians. The detection of an abdominal mass represents a common finding in clinical practice. The aim of this study was to retrospectively describe the tissue distribution and diagnosis of abdominal masses amenable to surgical removal in a canine population. Dogs with abdominal masses with a minimum diameter of 3 cm were selected. Cases were classified, based on the anatomical location, as splenic, gastrointestinal, hepatobiliary, genital, and masses not associated with any organ. Masses were surgically removed and formalin-fixed for the histological examination. Collected data were statistically analyzed. A total of 123 masses were collected from 122 dogs. Sixty-nine masses were classified as malignant neoplasia, 15 as benign, and 39 as non-neoplastic. The abdominal masses were 5.8-fold more likely to be malignant if located in the gastrointestinal tract (p = 0.01). A significant association between the size and the site of the masses was identified, the masses not associated with any organ being larger than the genital and splenic lesions (p = 0.008). This case series describes the most frequent location in association with the histopathological diagnosis of canine abdominal masses and suggests that the gastrointestinal location was related to a higher risk of representing a malignant neoplasm.

Highlights

The detection of an abdominal mass represents a common finding in clinical practice, and several differential diagnoses have been recognized in both dogs and cats, including benign [1,2,3,4] and malignant conditions [5,6,7,8]
Epidemiological data regarding canine abdominal masses have been focused on specific diagnoses and sites, with the majority of the studies describing splenic and hepatic masses [12,15,16,17], while data comparing the frequency of benign versus malignant lesions in different sites are lacking
Abdominal masses in dogs sampled for histological diagnosis and referred to a single histopathology diagnostic service were collected from two distinct referral centers between

Summary

Introduction

The detection of an abdominal mass represents a common finding in clinical practice, and several differential diagnoses have been recognized in both dogs and cats, including benign [1,2,3,4] and malignant conditions [5,6,7,8]. The treatment and outcome of a patient with an abdominal mass depend on the origin of the mass, the cytological diagnosis (if available), the stage of the disease (in case of malignant lesions), and whether or not surgical treatment is an option. Epidemiological data regarding canine abdominal masses have been focused on specific diagnoses and sites, with the majority of the studies describing splenic and hepatic masses [12,15,16,17], while data comparing the frequency of benign versus malignant lesions in different sites are lacking

Objectives

Methods

Discussion

Conclusion