Minimal atelectasis and poorly aerated lung on thoracic CT images of normal dogs acquired under sedation.

General anesthesia optimizes image quality of thoracic CT in dogs by providing patient immobilization and respiratory control. However, it also comes with disadvantages that may serve as a detractor to the use of CT in veterinary practice. With the use of multidetector helical CT combined with injectable sedation for restraint, parameters such as atelectasis and poorly aerated lung should not be appreciably different from what has been observed in dogs under general anesthesia. This prospective pilot study aimed to evaluate the mean lung attenuation and the amount of atelectasis and poorly aerated lung on thoracic CT images acquired under injectable sedation in normal dogs. The entire thorax of 10 client-owned dogs was scanned. Attenuation measurements were generated by three-dimensional reconstruction software. Mean ± SD lung attenuation was -707.0 ± 60.0. Atelectasis was not identified on any of the scans. Hypoinflated lung, the percentage of lung parenchyma with attenuation greater than -500 and -250 Hounsfield units (HU), was 10.7 ± 4.7% and 2.4 ± 1.2% (mean ± SD), respectively. There was no significant change in these percentages over time. Compared to previously published data, thoracic CT images obtained under sedation had mean attenuation comparable to normal expiratory lung and a lower percentage of poorly aerated lung compared to that of anesthetized dogs. Using sedation to complete canine thoracic CT does not itself lead to alterations of lung attenuation and may confer less hypoinflation and atelectasis than general anesthesia.

Health risks for marine mammal workers.

Marine mammals can be infected with zoonotic pathogens and show clinical signs of disease, or be asymptomatic carriers of such disease agents. While isolated cases of human disease from contact with marine mammals have been reported, no evaluation of the risks associated with marine mammal work has been attempted. Therefore, we designed a survey to estimate the risk of work-related injuries and illnesses in marine mammal workers and volunteers. The 17-question survey asked respondents to describe their contact with marine mammals, injuries sustained, and/or illnesses acquired during their period of marine mammal exposure. Most respondents, 88% (423/483), were researchers and rehabilitators. Of all respondents, 50% (243/483) reported suffering an injury caused by a marine mammal, and 23% (110/483) reported having a skin rash or reaction. Marine mammal work-related illnesses commonly reported included: 'seal finger' (Mycoplasma spp. or Erysipelothrix rhusiopathiae), conjunctivitis, viral dermatitis, bacterial dermatitis, and non-specific contact dermatitis. Although specific diagnoses could not be confirmed by a physician through this study, severe illnesses were reported and included tuberculosis, leptospirosis, brucellosis, and serious sequelae to seal finger. Risk factors associated with increased odds of injury and illness included prolonged and frequent exposure to marine mammals; direct contact with live marine mammals; and contact with tissue, blood, and excretions. Diagnosis of zoonotic disease was often aided by veterinarians; therefore, workers at risk should be encouraged to consult with a marine mammal veterinarian as well as a physician, especially if obtaining a definitive diagnosis for an illness becomes problematic.