Download PDF
Tierarztl Prax Ausg K Kleintiere Heimtiere 2006; 34(03): 157-167
DOI: 10.1055/s-0037-1622526
Hund/Katze
Schattauer GmbH

Verletzungen durch hölzerne Fremdkörper beim Hund

Retrospektive Studie über ein häufig unterschätztes KrankheitsbildInjuries through wooden foreign bodies in dogsA retrospective study of frequently underestimated wounds
C. Thiel
1   Aus der Klinik für Kleintiere – Chirurgie (Vorstand: Prof. Dr. M. Kramer) der Justus-Liebig-Universität-Gießen
,
H. Frese
1   Aus der Klinik für Kleintiere – Chirurgie (Vorstand: Prof. Dr. M. Kramer) der Justus-Liebig-Universität-Gießen
,
S. Tacke
1   Aus der Klinik für Kleintiere – Chirurgie (Vorstand: Prof. Dr. M. Kramer) der Justus-Liebig-Universität-Gießen
,
K. Herde
1   Aus der Klinik für Kleintiere – Chirurgie (Vorstand: Prof. Dr. M. Kramer) der Justus-Liebig-Universität-Gießen
,
M. Kramer
1   Aus der Klinik für Kleintiere – Chirurgie (Vorstand: Prof. Dr. M. Kramer) der Justus-Liebig-Universität-Gießen
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

Eingegangen: 09 June 2005

akzeptiert: 18 January 2006

Publication Date:
05 January 2018 (online)

    Permissions and Reprints

Zusammenfassung

Gegenstand: Darstellung von Stockverletzungen beim Hund mit Eruierung geeigneter diagnostischer und therapeutischer Optionen.

Material und Methode: Retrospektive Auswertung der Daten von 89 Patienten, die von 1990 bis 2004 mit Stockverletzungen vorgestellt wurden.

Ergebnisse: Eine erhöhte Inzidenz bestand ab dem ersten bis zum vierten Lebensjahr. Häufig betroffen waren agile Hunde (mittel)großer Rassen. Die Erkrankungsdauer variierte erheblich. Fast immer ergab bereits der Vorbericht einen Hinweis auf eine Stockverletzung. Am häufigsten bestand eine Verletzung des Mund- und Rachenraumes. In 46 der 70 Fälle war die Adspektion der Mundhöhle am wachen Patienten nicht durchführbar oder es konnten zunächst keine Verletzungen festgestellt werden. Dabei handelte es sich zu über 50% um tiefer gehende Wundhöhlen oder Stichkanäle. Bei 10 Hunden lag eine Ösophagusperforation vor. Die Perforation an einer Stelle des Körpers ohne Beteiligung der Mundhöhle trat bei 19 der 89 Tiere auf. Die Diagnostik im Körper verbliebener Fremdkörper(teile) gestaltet sich vielfach schwierig. Nur bei vier Hunden konnte der Fremdkörper anhand des Röntgenbildes diagnostiziert werden. Sekundäre Veränderungen (Lufteinschlüsse in Muskulatur und Bindegewebe, weichteildichte Verschattungen, knöcherne Reaktionen, Pneumo-, Liquidothorax, Pneumomediastinum) wurden in 63 Fällen röntgenologisch diagnostiziert. Die sonographische Untersuchung erwies sich bei 31 von 39 Hunden als richtig positiv bzw. negativ. Sieben (7,9%) der 89 Patienten verstarben an den Verletzungsfolgen.

Schlussfolgerung und klinische Relevanz: Verletzungen durch hölzerne Fremdkörper kommen bei Hunden häufig vor und werden oft unterschätzt. Bei Verdacht muss die Mundhöhle in Sedation oder Narkose sorgfältig untersucht werden. Röntgenaufnahmen von Hals und Thorax sollten routinemäßig angefertigt werden. Die Sonographie bietet sich bei chronischen fistelartigen Veränderungen oder Zubildungen an und dient vor allem zur Lokalisierung eines Fremdkörpers. Die frühzeitige Fremdkörperentfernung und die adäquate Versorgung der Patienten kann schwerwiegende Folgen vermeiden.

Summary

Objective: Presentation of injuries caused by wooden foreign bodies in dogs and evaluation of diagnostic and therapeutic options.

Material and methods: Retrospective evaluation of the data of 89 dogs, which were presented with wooden foreign body wounds between 1990 and 2004.

Results: Middle and large breed, agile dogs aged one to four years showed an increased risk. The time until presentation varied. In 86 cases, anamnesis pointed to a trauma with a wooden foreign body. In most of the cases (n = 70) the entry of that wooden foreign body was within the oral cavity. While in 46 of the 70 dogs no inspection of the oral cavity was possible, or there was no hint of an injury at inspection in the unsedated animal, more than 50% showeda deeper stab wound. Ten of them had a perforation of the esophagus.A perforation ata point of the body other than the oral cavity was shown in 19 of the 89 patients. The diagnosis of wooden foreign bodies is often difficult. Only in four cases there was evidence of the foreign body itself on radiographic examination. More often (63 cases) there were secondary radiographic changes like airfilled areas in muscles, soft tissue shadowing, bony reactions, pneumothorax or pneumomediastinum. In 31 of 39 cases (79.5%), the sonographic examination was correctly positive or negative. Seven of 89 patients (7.9%) with wooden foreign body injuries died in the sequence of that trauma.

Conclusion and clinical relevance: Injuries through wooden foreign bodies are common in dogs and often underestimated. If suspected, oral examination in sedation or anesthesia must be performed. Radiographs of the neck region and thorax should be taken. Ultrasonography is very valuable in detecting foreign bodies in chronic fistula or swelling. Early removal and proper treatment can avoid fatal consequences.

Schlüsselwörter

Trauma - Stockverletzung - Hund

Key words

Trauma - wooden foreign bodies - dog
 

  • Literatur

  • 1 Adams R, Nixon A, Hager D. Use of intraoperative ultrasonography to identify a cervical foreign body– A case report. Vet Surg 1987; 16/5: 384-8.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Bauer AR, Yutani D. Computed tomographic localization of wooden foreign bodies in children’s extremities. Arch Surg 1983; 118 (09) 1084-6.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Belfer RA, Ochsenschläger DW, Tomaski SM. Penetrating injury to the oral cavity: a case report and review of literature. J Emerg Med 1995; 13 (03) 331-5.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Bhattacharjee N, Hossain MM, Mazumder SMKA, Khan MK. A wooden foreign body in the neck. Bangladesh Med Res Counc Bull 1997; 23 (02) 63-5.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Bonath KH. Kleintierkrankheiten, Band 2: Chirurgie der Weichteile. Stuttgart: Ulmer; 1991: 98-101 122–3.
    Google Scholar
  • 6 Brennan SF, Connery N, Tobin E, Mooney CT, Jones BR. Gastrocutaneous fistula as a result of migration of a foreign body in a dog. J Small Anim Pract 2004; 45 (06) 304-6.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Brockmann DJ, Trout NJ. Epidural migration of a suspected pharyngeal foreign body in a dog. Vet Rec 1991; 128 (09) 199-216.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Cawthon LA, Meza MP, Eggleston DE. The radiolucent wooden foreign body. Pediatr Emerg Care 1991; 07 (04) 224-5.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Chalmers JAC, Graham TR, Magee PG. A concealed impalement injury of the chest – an unusual intrathoracic foreign body. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 1989; 03 (03) 267-9.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Cracchiolo A. Wooden foreign bodies in the foot. Am J Surg 1980; 140 (04) 585-7.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Daoust PY. Porcupine quill in the brain of a dog. Vet Rec 1991; 128 (18) 436.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Dumarey A, De Maeseneer M, Ernst C. Large wooden foreign bodies in the hand: recognition of occult fragments with ultrasound. Emerg Radiol 2004; 10 (06) 337-9.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Ellis M, Laskawi R, Lux U. Klinische Präsentation und Verläufe nach Endoskopien tracheobronchialer Fremdkörper. Oto-Rhini-Laryngologia-Nova 2001; 11 (3–4): 198-203.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Flom LL, Ellis GL. Radiologic Evaluation of Foreign Bodies. Emerg Med Clin North Am 1992; 10 (01) 163-77.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Fritsch R, Gerwing M. Sonographie bei Hund und Katze. Stuttgart: Enke; 1993: 188.
    Google Scholar
  • 16 Ginsburg MJ, Ellis GL, Flom LL. Detection of soft tissue foreign bodies by plain radiography, xerography, computed tomography and ultrasonography. Ann Emerg Med 1990; 19 (06) 701-3.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Graham DD. Ultrasound in the emergency department: detection of wooden foreign bodies in the soft tissues. J Emerg Med 2002; 22 (01) 75-9.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Grieve JP, Pracy P, Walsh R, Bowdler DA. Palatal trauma: an unusual cause of a parotid sinus. Int J Ped Otorhinolaryngol 1996; 34 (03) 253-7.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Griffiths LG, Tiruneh R, Sullivan M, Reid SWJ. Oropharyngeal penetrating injuries in 50 dogs: A retrospective study. Vet Surg 2000; 29: 383-8.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Hallstrom M. Surgery of canine mouth and pharynx. Small Anim Pract 1970; 11: 105-11.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Higo R, Matsumoto Y, Ichimura K, Kaga K. Foreign bodies in the aerodigestive tract in pediatric patients. Auris Nasus Larynx 2003; 30 (04) 397-401.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Hornung G, Miram W. Verhaltenslehre – Materialien für den Sekundarbereich2– Biologie. Braunschweig: Schroedel Schulbuchverlag; 1987. 49, 60.
    Google Scholar
  • 23 Hunt GB, Worth A, Marchevsky A. Migration of wooden skewer foreign bodies from the gastrointestinal tract in eight dogs. J Small Anim Pract 2004; 45 (07) 362-7.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Hunter TB, Taljanovic MS. Foreign bodies. Radiographics 2003; 23 (03) 731-57.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Jabaly-Habib HY, Muallm MS, Garzozi HJ. An intraorbital injury from an occult wooden foreign body. J Pediatr Ophthalmol Strabismus 2002; 39 (05) 300-2.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Jacobson JA, Powell A, Craig JC, Bouffard JA, van Holsbeeck MT. Wooden foreign bodies in soft tissues: Detection at US Radiology. 1998; 206 (01) 45-8.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Jänicke S, Wagner W. Retained pieces of wood in the retromaxillary space:a case report. J Craniomaxillofac Surg 1995; 23 (05) 312-6.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Jeen YT, Chun HJ, Song CW, Um SH, Lee SW, Choi JH, Kim CD, Ryu HS, Hyun JH. Endoscopic removal of sharp foreign bodies impacted in the esophagus. Endoscopy 2001; 33 (06) 518-22.
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Johnston DE, Summers BA. Osteomyelitis of the lumbar vertebrae in dogs caused by grass-seed foreign bodies. Austr Vet J 1971; 47: 289-94.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Kramer M, Gerwing M. Die sonographische Diagnostik von Fremdkörpern bei Hund und Katze. Tierärztl Prax 1996; 24: 378-84.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 31 Kremer K, Müller E. Die Chirurgische Poliklinik, 2. Aufl. Stuttgart: Thieme; 1987. Kapitel 4.
    Google Scholar
  • 32 Little CM, Parker MG, Callowich MC, Sartori JC. The ultrasonic detection of soft tissue foreign bodies. Invest Radiol 1986; 21 (03) 275-7.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 33 Lo TDBue, Deutsch TA, Lobick J, Turner DA. Detection and localization of nonmetallic intraocular foreign bodies by magnetic resonance imaging. Arch Ophthalmol 1988; 106 (02) 260-1.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 34 Lydiatt DD, Hollins RRH, Moyer DJ, Davis LF. Problems of evaluation of penetrating foreign bodies with computed tomography scans: report of cases. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 1987; 45 (11) 965-8.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 35 Manthey DE, Storrow AB, Milbourn JM, Wagner BJ. Ultrasound versus radiography in the detection of soft tissue foreign bodies. Ann Emerg Med 1996; 28 (01) 7-9.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 36 Matern U, Aschendorff A, Krebs A, Kohlberger E, Ruckauer KD. A new method for extracting wooden foreign bodies from the upper esophagus. Endoscopy 2000; 32 (12) 1002-3.
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 37 Middha VP, Vaishya R. Lesions produced by splinters of wood in soft tissue and bone Int Orthop. 1990; 14 (01) 312-6.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 38 Mizel MS, Steinmetz ND, Trepman E. Detection of wooden foreign bodies in muscle and tissue: Experimental comparison of computed tomography, magnet resonance imaging and ultrasonography. Foot Ankle Int 1994; 15 (08) 437-43.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 39 Mosca S, Manes G, Martino R, Amitrano L, Bottino V, Bove A, Camera A, De Nucci C, Di Costanzo G, Guardascione M, Lampasi F, Picascia S, Picciotto FP, Riccio E, Rocco VP, Uomo G, Balzano A. Endoscopic management of foreign bodies in the upper gastrointestinal tract: report on a series of 414 adult patients. Endoscopy 2001; 33 (08) 692-6.
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 40 Ochiai H, Yamakawa Y, Fukushima H. Neuroimaging of a wooden foreign body retained for 5 months in the temporalis muscle following penetrating trauma with a chopstick – Case report. Neurol Med Chir (Tokyo) 1999; 39 (11) 744-7.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 41 Oikarinen KS, Nieminen TM, Mäkärräinen H, Pyhtinen J. Visibility of foreign bodies in soft tissue in plain radiographs, computed tomography, magnet resonance imaging and ultrasound – an in vitro study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 1993; 22 (02) 119-24.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 42 O’Reilly A, Beck C, Mouatt JG, Stenner VJ. Exophthalmus due to a wooden foreign body in a dog. Aust VetJ 2002; 80 (05) 268-71.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 43 Penninck D, Mitchell SL. Ultrasonographic detection of ingested and perforating wooden foreign bodies in four dogs. J Am Vet Med Assoc 2003; 223 (02) 206-9.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 44 Peterson JJ, Bancroft LW, Kransdorf MJ. Wooden foreign bodies: imaging appearance. AmJ Roentgenol 2002; 178 (03) 557-62.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 45 Poulsen CNautrup, Tobias R. Atlas und Lehrbuch der Ultraschalldiagnostik bei Hund und Katze. Hannover: Schlütersche; 1996: 110.
    Google Scholar
  • 46 Pratt JNJ, Munro EAC, Kirby BM. Osteomyelitis of the atlanto-occipital region asa sequel to a pharyngeal stick injury. J Small Anim Pract 1999; 40: 446-8.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 47 Rockett MS, Gentile SC, Gudas CJ, Brage ME, Zygmunt KH. The use of ultrasonography for the detection of retained wooden bodies in the foot. J Foot Ankle Surg 1995; 34 (05) 478-84.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 48 Schimpl G, Weber G, Haberlik A, Hollwarth ME. Foreign body aspiration in children. The advantages of emergency endoscopy and foreign body removal. Anesthesist 1991; 40 (09) 479-82.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 49 Specht CS, Varga JH, Jalali MM, Edelstein JP. Orbitocranial wooden foreign body diagnosed by magnetic resonance imaging. Dry wood can be isodense with air and orbital fat by computed tomography. Surv Ophthalmol 1992; 36 (05) 341-4.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 50 Spouge AR, Weisbrod GL, Hermann SJ, Chamberlain DW. Wooden foreign body in the lung parenchyma. Am J Roentgenol 1990; 154 (05) 999-1001.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 51 Staudte KL, Hopper BJ, Gibson NR, Read RA. Use of ultrasonography to facilitate surgical removal of non-enteric foreign bodies in 17 dogs. J Small Anim Pract 2004; 45 (08) 395-400.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 52 Suramo I, Pamilo M. Ultrasound examination of foreign bodies. An in vitro investigation. Acta Radiol Diagn (Stockh) 1986; 27 (04) 463-6.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 53 Turner J, Wilde CH, Hughes KC, Meilstrup JW, Manders EK. Ultrasoundguided retrieval of small foreign objects in subcutaneous tissue. Ann Emerg Med 1997; 29 (06) 731-4.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 54 White RAS, Lane JG. Pharyngeal stick penetration injuries in the dog. J Small Anim Pract 1988; 29: 13-35.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 55 Woolfson JM, Wesley RE. Magnetic resonance imaging and computed tomographic scanning of fresh (green) wood foreign bodies in dogs orbits. Ophthal Plast Reconstr Surg 1990; 06 (04) 237-40.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 56 Yoshii M, Enoki T, Mizukawa A, Okisaka S. Intraorbital wooden foreign body. Acta Ophthalmol Scand 2004; 82 (04) 492-3.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 57 Young B, Klopp L, Albrecht M, Kraft S. Imaging diagnosis: Magnet resonance imaging of a cervical wooden foreign body in a dog. Vet Radiol Ultrasound 2004; 45 (06) 538-41.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar