S. A. VALLANCE, R. J. W. BELL, M. SPRIET, P. H. KASS, S. M. PUCHALSKI Equine Veterinary Journal January 2012 44 1 51-56 Reasons for performing study: To date, few reports exist comparing magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and computed tomography (CT) for imaging of the equine distal limb, yet clinicians are required to decide which modality to use regularly. Objectives: To report and compare anatomic visualisation scores obtained for CT, contrast enhanced CT (CECT) and standing low-field MRI (LFMRI) in the equine foot. Hypothesis: Anatomic visualisation score discrepancies would exist between CT, CECT and LFMRI. Methods: Images of 22 lame horses (31 limbs) undergoing both CT and LFMRI of the foot were reviewed. When available, CECT images were reviewed. The deep digital flexor tendon (DDFT) was categorised into proximal to distal levels (A–D), structures were assigned visualisation scores (Grades 0–3) and technique comparisons were made using the paired marginal homogeneity test. Results: Computed tomography and LFMRI had similar visibility scores for the navicular bone, middle phalanx, DDFT-B, collateral ligaments of the distal interphalangeal joint and collateral sesamoidean ligament of the navicular bone. The proximal and distal phalanx had lower visibility scores with LFMRI. The distal DDFT (C–D), distal sesamoidean impar ligament and synovial structures had higher scores with LFMRI. Contrast enhanced CT lowered DDFT and collateral sesamoidean ligament scores and raised distal interphalangeal synovium CT visualisation scores. Conclusions and potential relevance: Visualisation scores differ depending on imaging technique and anatomic structure of interest. This information increases our understanding of the limitations of CT, CECT and LFMRI to visualise anatomy in clinical cases.

• Comparative Study
• CT
• Equine
• Imaging
• MRI