Ultrasonographic approach and findings in calves with hydranencephaly

Abstract

Background Teratogenic viral infections may proceed to hydranencephaly in cattle. Post‐mortem and antemortem diagnosis can be achieved by necropsy or ultrasonography, CT‐scan and MRI techniques. Objectives The aim of this study was to determine how effective ultrasonography approach is in detecting hydranencephaly in calves. Methods In this study, ultrasonography images were obtained from brains of nine Holstein claves, of the same age, with neurological signs (due to Akabane virus infection), approaching from the caudal part of the temporal bone. To confirm the obtained images, the same approach was used to obtain images from a normal calf of the same age. The thickness of the temporal bone was measured and compared in seven affected and the healthy calves, using CT‐scan images. Results In ultrasonographic images, temporal bone (as a hyperechoic structure) and temporal cortical mantle (as an echogenic structure) were noted in the right and left side of the skull. The medial part of the image showed presence of fluid in an anechoic region, instead of brain parenchyma. Falx cerebri was also seen as a floating hyperechoic line in the middle part in all patients. There was no statistically significant difference between the thickness of temporal bone in normal and affected calves (p = 0.502). All findings were confirmed by necropsy. Conclusions Transtemporal approach is a novel and easy approach to study the brain in calves. This is the first study on the hydranencephalic brains of claves, using ultrasonography by transtemporal approach.

Use and adequacy of non‐pregnancy diagnosis in cow. Which future?

“…In the mid‐1980s, B‐mode ultrasonography began to be used as a complementary examination in bovine reproductive management (DesCôteaux et al, 2009). This technique was initially used for pregnancy diagnosis (Photo 1) (Fissore et al, 1986; Szenci et al, 1999) but soon was utilized to study follicular dynamics, corpus luteum (Acosta & Miyamoto, 2004; Kito et al, 1986), embryonic and foetal development (Curran et al, 1986; Kraisoon et al, 2018), uterine pathologies (Fissore et al, 1986; Meira et al, 2012), gestational losses (Chaffaux et al, 1986; Chaudhary & Purohit, 2012) foetal sexing (Photo 2) (Ali & Fahmy, 2008; Fricke, 2002) physio‐pathology of ovary (Photo 3) (Díaz et al, 2019; Gnemmi, 2001; Quintela et al, 2012) and uterus (Bollwein et al, 2002; Debertolis et al, 2016; Sharma et al, 2019) (Photo 4), diagnosis of twin gestation (Photo 5) (Colloton et al, 2010; López‐Gatius et al, 2017; Silva del Rio et al, 2009), diagnosis of embryo and foetal death (Photo 6) (Colloton et al, 2010; Gnemmi, 2004b), diagnosis of foetal malformation (Photo 7) (DesCôteaux et al, 2010; Gnemmi, 2004b; Gorjidooz et al, 2021) diagnosis of gestational diseases (Photo 8) (DesCôteaux et al, 2009; Murakami et al, 2019) and recently also to improve the efficiency of selecting donor cows/heifers for embryos and oocytes and to improve efficiency of selecting recipients for embryo transfer (Pugliesi et al, 2018; Stroud & Durocher, 2010).…”