Skip to content
Customize Consent Preferences

We use cookies to help you navigate efficiently and perform certain functions. You will find detailed information about all cookies under each consent category below.

The cookies that are categorized as "Necessary" are stored on your browser as they are essential for enabling the basic functionalities of the site. ... 

Always Active

Necessary cookies are required to enable the basic features of this site, such as providing secure log-in or adjusting your consent preferences. These cookies do not store any personally identifiable data.

No cookies to display.

Functional cookies help perform certain functionalities like sharing the content of the website on social media platforms, collecting feedback, and other third-party features.

No cookies to display.

Analytical cookies are used to understand how visitors interact with the website. These cookies help provide information on metrics such as the number of visitors, bounce rate, traffic source, etc.

No cookies to display.

Performance cookies are used to understand and analyze the key performance indexes of the website which helps in delivering a better user experience for the visitors.

No cookies to display.

Advertisement cookies are used to provide visitors with customized advertisements based on the pages you visited previously and to analyze the effectiveness of the ad campaigns.

No cookies to display.

prostatitis

Sonopath Forum

Just saw a 4 year old MI Brittany spaniel w/ hx of inappropriate urination.  Free catch urinalysis has show an active sediment, but bladder cysto was clean.  Ultrasound showed a bright, smooth, uniform, enlarged prostate (3 cm, so still less than the 5 cm size I have listed as normal for in tact dogs).  He does not appreciate rectal exams/palpation of the prostate.  I suspect prostatitis; no evidence of absesses or neoplasia grossly.  I am recommending a prostatic wash w/ C&S, but just want to see your thoughts on that vs.

Just saw a 4 year old MI Brittany spaniel w/ hx of inappropriate urination.  Free catch urinalysis has show an active sediment, but bladder cysto was clean.  Ultrasound showed a bright, smooth, uniform, enlarged prostate (3 cm, so still less than the 5 cm size I have listed as normal for in tact dogs).  He does not appreciate rectal exams/palpation of the prostate.  I suspect prostatitis; no evidence of absesses or neoplasia grossly.  I am recommending a prostatic wash w/ C&S, but just want to see your thoughts on that vs. FNA.  I suspect I may not get much sample from FNA.  Thank you!

Comments

randyhermandvm

A prostatic wash with

A prostatic wash with cytology and culture sounds like a good idea

kromero

Thank you!

Thank you!

EL

I actually prefer fna under

I actually prefer fna under sedation and corkscrew technique; 2 sticks one for cyto and another with a touch of saline in the syringe and drawing back a bit for culture fluid. This way I can target any specifically hot regions or cysts or abscesses. prostatic wash I have found to be more vague on what we are analyzing.

rlobetti

Here is an old paper looking

Here is an old paper looking at various techniques for collectong prostatic material, showing not much difference between methods. Personally prefer FNA as it is quick, involves less material, and as Eric states, you can position the needle.

 

Powe JR, Canfield PJ, Martin PA. Evaluation of the cytologic diagnosis of canine prostatic disorders. Vet Clin Pathol. 2004;33:150-4.

BACKGROUND:

Canine prostatic disease is commonly investigated using cytologic techniques, especially now that ultrasound-guided fine needle cell aspiration (US-FNA) is widely available. Few studies, however, have evaluated the diagnostic accuracy of prostatic cytology.

OBJECTIVE:

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the usefulness of cytologic investigation of prostatic disease using US-FNA and other methods in comparison with histopathologic diagnosis.

METHODS:

Cytologic and histopathologic specimens of prostate or paraprostatic tissue from 25 adult dogs were retrospectively evaluated. Cytologic samples were obtained by US-FNA, prostatic massage, or direct impression smears or aspirates of tissue at surgery. Histopathologic sections were obtained from tissue collected by biopsy or at necropsy.

RESULTS:

Cytologic diagnoses were categorized as nondiagnostic (n = 2); cyst (n = 1); squamous metaplasia (n = 2); inflammation (n = 4); benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH; n = 5); inflammation and BPH (n = 3); inflammation, BPH, and neoplasia (n = 1); inflammation and neoplasia (n = 3); and neoplasia (n = 4). Cytologic diagnoses agreed with final histologic diagnoses in 20 of the 25 cases (80%). Of those samples collected by US-FNA, 75% were concordant. Four samples obtained by US-FNA and 1 sample obtained by prostatic massage and wash had discordant results.

CONCLUSIONS:

The results of this study suggest strong agreement between cytologic and histopathologic diagnoses for prostatic conditions. Discordance in results obtained by US-FNA usually was the result of the pathologic process rather than a failure to obtain an appropriate sample.