- Joined
- Jan 31, 2014
- Messages
- 5,234
- Purraise
- 2,583
J
Jenny22
this was in the Comments section of Dexter's report.
(I think the mods might have removed the report accidentally...since it was in post #15...and they usually will remove any identifying info due to privacy...but then place the report back into the post. I'll flag the post and ask them.)
**(Edit to add: The lung fluid was worrisome...and that is what caused the second Vet place ...to not insert the feeding tube.)
I would have thought that the Vet would have already seen any mass lesions, or cardiac disease...if a fine needle aspirate was done...with guided ultrasound.
Since don't they do fine needle aspirates with ultrasound guidance?
Or maybe I'm mistaken....if the FNA (fine needle aspirate)...was only done on the lung fluid or exudate around the lungs...then maybe the Vet did not use an ultrasound...in this case.
Not sure.
Also strange that they don't do proBNP...on blood panel labs.
I didn't see that number anywhere in the blood labs that Dexy posted, above.
this was in the Comments section of Dexter's report.
(I think the mods might have removed the report accidentally...since it was in post #15...and they usually will remove any identifying info due to privacy...but then place the report back into the post. I'll flag the post and ask them.)
So really they want D Dexy ....to either do an ultrasound...or more testing to rule out...the above differentials.Pathologist Report:
...No evidence of an infectious agent or neoplasia in this sample
And in the Comments:
Differentials to consider include cardiac insufficiency, neoplasia, cardiomyopathy, FIP, vascular disease (eg. Thromboemboli), organ torsion or inflammation.
Is there evidence of a mass lesion?
Is there evidence of cardiac disease?
The neutrophils may be present due to irritation of the fluid or underlying low grade inflammation.
**(Edit to add: The lung fluid was worrisome...and that is what caused the second Vet place ...to not insert the feeding tube.)
I would have thought that the Vet would have already seen any mass lesions, or cardiac disease...if a fine needle aspirate was done...with guided ultrasound.
Since don't they do fine needle aspirates with ultrasound guidance?
Or maybe I'm mistaken....if the FNA (fine needle aspirate)...was only done on the lung fluid or exudate around the lungs...then maybe the Vet did not use an ultrasound...in this case.
Not sure.
Also strange that they don't do proBNP...on blood panel labs.
I didn't see that number anywhere in the blood labs that Dexy posted, above.
Last edited: