Search Results
You are looking at 1 - 2 of 2 items for
- Author or Editor: Allison Tyler x
- Refine by Access: All Content x
Abstract
OBJECTIVE
To evaluate whether cell-based and tissue-based immunofluorescent assays (IFAs) run in parallel could be used to detect glial fibrillary acidic protein (GFAP) autoantibodies in the CSF of dogs with meningoencephalitis of unknown origin (MUO) and other CNS disorders
ANIMALS
15 CSF samples obtained from dogs with presumed MUO (n = 5), CNS disease other than MUO (5), and idiopathic epilepsy (5).
PROCEDURES
All CSF samples underwent parallel analysis with a cell-based IFA that targeted the α isoform of human GFAP and a tissue-based IFA that involved mouse brain cryosections. Descriptive data were generated.
RESULTS
Only 1 CSF sample yielded mildly positive results on the cell-based IFA; that sample was from 1 of the dogs with presumed MUO. The remaining 14 CSF samples tested negative on the cell-based IFA. All 15 CSF samples yielded negative results on the tissue-based IFA.
CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE
Results suggested that concurrent use of a cell-based IFA designed to target the human GFAP-α isoform and a tissue-based IFA that involved mouse tissue cryosections was inadequate for detection of GFAP autoantibodies in canine CSF samples. Given that GFAP autoantibodies were likely present in the CSF samples analyzed, these findings suggested that epitopes differ substantially between canine and human GFAP and that canine GFAP autoanti-body does not bind to mouse GFAP. Without a positive control, absence of GFAP autoantibody in this cohort cannot be ruled out. Further research is necessary to develop a noninvasive and sensitive method for diagnosis of MUO in dogs.
Abstract
Objective—To determine community approaches to medical and behavioral diseases in dogs and cats.
Design—Cross-sectional descriptive study.
Sample—97 companion animal veterinarians and 424 animal owners.
Procedures—Companion animal veterinarians in central Iowa ranked medical or behavioral diseases or conditions by what they thought most clients would consider healthy, treatable, manageable, or unhealthy (unmanageable or untreatable). In a parallel survey, cat- or dog-owning households in central Iowa responded to a telephone survey regarding the relationship of their animal in the household, owner willingness to provide medical or behavioral interventions, and extent of financial commitment to resolving diseases.
Results—One hundred twenty common health or behavioral disorders in cats and dogs were ranked by veterinarians as healthy, treatable, manageable, or unhealthy (unmanageable or untreatable) on the basis of their opinion of what most clients would do. Findings were in congruence with animal owners' expressed willingness to provide the type of care required to maintain animals with many acute or chronic medical and behavioral conditions. In general, owners indicated a willingness to use various treatment modalities and spend money on veterinary services when considering current or previously owned animals as well as hypothetical situations with an animal. Past experiences with veterinary care in which an animal did not recover fully did not diminish the willingness of respondents to use veterinary services again in the future.
Conclusions and Clinical Relevance—These results provide a baseline indication of community willingness to address medical or behavioral conditions in dogs and cats. These considerations can be used in conjunction with Asilomar Accords recommendations to assess adoptability of cats and dogs in animal shelters.
