Search Results

You are looking at 1 - 4 of 4 items for

  • Author or Editor: Pamela E. J. Johnston x
  • Refine by Access: All Content x
Clear All Modify Search
in Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association

Abstract

Objective—To evaluate 4 rapid supravital stains and 3 preparation techniques for use in the intraoperative diagnosis of intracranial lesions.

Animals—10 dogs and 1 cat euthanatized for intracranial lesions.

Procedure—Specimens were taken from lesions and slides prepared, using 3 techniques: touch impression, medium-pressure impression, or smear preparation. Preparations were then stained with 4 stains: modified Wright stain, May-Grünwald-Giemsa, toluidine blue, and zynostain and examined in a blinded randomized fashion. Cytologic diagnosis was compared with histopathologic diagnosis and classified on the basis of identification of the pathologic process and specific diagnosis into the following categories: complete correlation, partial correlation, or no correlation.

Results—An overall diagnostic accuracy of 81% (107/132) was achieved on the basis of a combination of partial and complete correlation. Of the stains examined, modified Wright stain appeared to be most accurate, with complete correlation in 17 of 33 (52%) specimens and partial correlation in 12 of 33 (36%) specimens. Of the preparation methods, touch preparation and smear preparation provided the most accurate results, with an overall diagnostic accuracy of 82% (36/44) for both methods. However, smear preparations appeared to be of greater diagnostic value, with fewer nondiagnostic specimens, compared with touch preparations.

Conclusions and Clinical Relevance—Cytologic preparations provide a useful diagnostic tool for the intraoperative diagnosis of intracranial lesions. All stains examined yielded promising results, the most accurate of which appeared to be the modified Wright stain. The smear preparation appeared to be the preparation method of greatest diagnostic value. (Am J Vet Res 2002;63:381–386)

Full access
in American Journal of Veterinary Research

Abstract

Objective—To evaluate the effectiveness of intervention efforts to halt 2 wildlife rabies epizootics from 1995 through 2003, including 9 oral rabies vaccination campaigns for coyotes and 8 oral rabies vaccination campaigns for gray foxes.

Design—Retrospective study.

Animals—98 coyotes during prevaccination surveillance and 963 coyotes and 104 nontarget animals during postvaccination surveillance in south Texas, and 699 gray foxes and 561 nontarget animals during postvaccination surveillance in west-central Texas.

Procedures—A recombinant-virus oral rabies vaccine in edible baits was distributed by aircraft for consumption by coyotes and gray foxes. Bait acceptance was monitored by use of microscopic analysis of tetracycline biomarker in upper canine teeth and associated bone structures in animals collected for surveillance. Serologic responses were monitored by testing sera for rabies virus–neutralizing antibodies by use of the rapid fluorescent focus inhibition test. The incidence of rabies in the distribution area was recorded via active and passive surveillance activities; tracking of rabies virus variants in confirmed rabid animals was used to determine the number and type of rabies cases before and after distributions of the vaccine.

Results—The expansion of both epizootics was halted as a result of the vaccine bait program. The number of laboratory-confirmed rabid animals attributable to the domestic dog-coyote rabies virus variant in south Texas declined to 0, whereas the number of laboratory- confirmed rabid animals attributable to the Texas fox rabies virus variant in west-central Texas decreased.

Conclusions and Clinical Relevance—Data indicated that oral rabies vaccination resulted in protective immunity in a sufficient percentage of the target wildlife population to preclude propagation of the disease and provided an effective means of controlling rabies in these species. ( J Am Vet Med Assoc 2005;227:785–792)

Restricted access
in Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association