Objective—To evaluate a urine dipstick test as a possible replacement for urine protein-tocreatinine (UPC) ratio for identifying proteinuria in dogs.
Sample Population—507 urine samples from adult dogs.
Procedures—Urine dipstick, UPC ratio, specific gravity (USG), and sediment testing were performed on 507 samples. With UPC ratio as the reference criterion, diagnostic accuracy of the urine dipstick test was calculated for the entire data set and for urine samples grouped by USG (≤ 1.012 or > 1.012; < 1.030 or ≥ 1.030). A UPC ratio < 0.2 was used to indicate absence of proteinuria.
Results—The sensitivity of the urine dipstick test for detection of proteinuria was > 90% when 0 mg of protein/dL (a 0+ result) was used to indicate a negative test result, and the specificity ranged from 40% to 60%, depending on the USG. Sensitivity decreased to a range of 56% to 81% when 30 mg of protein/dL (a 1+ result) was used as the cutoff, depending on the USG, but the specificity increased to > 90%. The likelihood of correctly identifying nonproteinuric dogs was low when the USG was ≤ 1.012, particularly when samples with a 1+ result were considered negative.
Conclusions and Clinical Relevance—For dogs with a dipstick-test result of 1+ and USG ≤ 1.012, proteinuria should be assessed by use of the UPC ratio; dogs with a USG value > 1.012 are likely nonproteinuric. When used together, the urine dipstick test and USG measurement were reliable as a rapid alternative to UPC ratio determination in dogs in this study.
OBJECTIVE To assess sensitivity and specificity of manual and automated measurements of reticulocyte percentage, number, and production index for classification of anemia in dogs.
DESIGN Retrospective case series
SAMPLE 174 blood smears from client-owned dogs with anemia collected between 1993 and 2013 for which reticulocyte parameters were determined manually (nonregenerative anemia, 22; preregenerative anemia, 23; regenerative anemia, 28) or with an automated laser-based counter (nonregenerative anemia, 66; preregenerative anemia, 17; regenerative anemia, 18).
PROCEDURES Diagnostic performance was evaluated with receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves by considering preregenerative anemia as nonregenerative or regenerative. Sensitivity, specificity, and positive likelihood ratio were calculated by use of cutoffs determined from ROC curves or published reference limits.
RESULTS Considering preregenerative anemia as non regenerative, areas under the curve (AUCs) for reticulocyte percentage, number, and production index were 97%, 93%, and 91% for manual counting and 93%, 90%, and 93% for automated counting. Sensitivity, specificity, and positive likelihood ratio were 82% to 86%, 82% to 87%, and 4.6 to 6.4, respectively. Considering preregenerative anemia as regenerative, AUCs were 77%, 82%, and 80% for manual counting and 81%, 82%, and 92% for automated counting. Sensitivity, specificity, and positive likelihood ratio were 72% to 74%, 76 to 87%, and 2.7 to 6.2, respectively.
CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE Whereas all reticulocyte parameters identified regeneration in anemic dogs, the performance of specific parameters was dependent on the method used. Findings suggested that lower cutoffs than published reference limits are preferred for reticulocyte number and production index and higher cutoffs are preferred for reticulocyte percentage. Reticulocyte production index may be useful when the pretest probability of regeneration is moderate.
Objective—To assess whether urine protein-to-creatinine (UPC) ratios determined in urine samples collected by cystocentesis versus those collected by free catch provide similar diagnostic information for dogs.
Animals—115 client-owned dogs evaluated because of various health problems requiring urinalysis or to screen for proteinuria in an area endemic for leishmaniasis.
Procedures—230 paired urine samples, 1 collected by cystocentesis and 1 by free catch, were collected from the 115 dogs. The UPC ratio was determined in paired urine samples (n = 162) from 81 dogs with no indication of active inflammation according to urine sediment analysis. On the basis of the UPC ratio of urine sample collected by cystocentesis, dogs were classified as nonproteinuric (UPC ratio < 0.2), borderline proteinuric (UPC ratio of 0.2 to 0.5), or proteinuric (UPC ratio > 0.5), according to the International Renal Interest Society (IRIS).
Results—The correlation between UPC ratio in urine samples collected by cystocentesis and by free catch was strong (r2 = 0.90); 75 of 81 (92.6%) dogs had UPC ratios from both urine samples that resulted in classification in the same IRIS substage with a kappa coefficient of 0.83.
Conclusions and Clinical Relevance—The UPC ratio in dogs was minimally affected in urine samples collected by free catch, thus allowing correct grading of proteinuria with this method. The high reliability of the UPC ratio in free-catch urine samples coupled with the ease of collection should increase the use of this value for assessment of proteinuria.
Objective—To determine whether preanalytic and analytic factors affect evaluation of the urinary protein-to-creatinine (UPC) ratio in dogs.
Sample—50 canine urine samples.
Procedures—The UPC ratio was measured to assess the intra-assay imprecision (20 measurements within a single session), the influence of predilution (1:10, 1:20, and 1:100) for urine creatinine concentration measurement, and the effect of storage at room temperature (approx 20°C), 4°C, and −20°C.
Results—The coefficient of variation at room temperature determined with the 1:20 predilution was < 10.0%, with the highest coefficients of variation found in samples with a low protein concentration or low urine specific gravity. This variability could result in misclassification of samples with UPC ratios close to the thresholds defined by the International Renal Interest Society to classify dogs as nonproteinuric (0.2), borderline proteinuric (0.21 to 0.50), or proteinuric (> 0.51). A proportional bias was found in samples prediluted 1:10, compared with samples prediluted 1:20 or 1:100. At room temperature, the UPC ratio did not significantly increase after 2 and 4 hours. After 12 hours at room temperature and at 4°C, the UPC ratio significantly increased. The UPC ratio did not significantly change during 3 months of storage at −20°C.
Conclusions and Clinical Relevance—The intra-assay precision of the UPC ratio was sufficiently low to avoid misclassification of samples, except for values close to 0.2 or 0.5. The optimal predilution ratio for urine creatinine concentration measurement was 1:20. A 1:100 predilution is recommended in samples with a urine specific gravity > 1.030. The UPC ratio must be measured as soon as samples are collected. Alternatively, samples should be immediately frozen to increase their stability and minimize the risk of misclassification of proteinuria.
Drug treatment of leishmaniasis in dogs is a challenge for veterinary practitioners. Because of its complex pathogenesis, leishmaniasis may manifest with various clinical signs, ranging from mild and nonspecific to those reflecting severe involvement of several organs. The immune response plays an important role in the development, outcome, and response to treatment of Leishmania infection in dogs.1 All known anti-Leishmania drugs used in dogs can lead to temporary or permanent remission of clinical signs, but none are sufficient to eliminate the infection.2 Indeed, all anti-Leishmania drugs currently used in dogs
Human infections with Leishmania protozoan parasites, transmitted by the bite of phlebotomine sand flies, cause visceral, cutaneous, or mucocutaneous leishmaniasis. Eighty-eight countries are affected, with > 2 million new infections worldwide each year.1 The most severe disease forms are anthroponotic VL due to Leishmania donovani in the Indian subcontinent and parts of central Asia and Africa and zoonotic VL due to Leishmania infantum (Leishmania chagasi) in the Mediterranean, parts of Asia, and Latin America.
Domestic dogs are the only confirmed domestic reservoir of zoonotic VL.2 Reports3–5
In the past decade, several issues have emerged regarding the epidemiology of leishmaniasis in dogs, including the increased incidence of infection in endemic zones, the northward spread of the infection to nonendemic areas of Europe, and the emergence of the disease in North America.1,2 Despite the increasing spread of the infection and growing concern for canine health, veterinary approaches to the disease remain heterogeneous. Accordingly, an expert panel, the CLWG, was established in November 2005 in collaboration with the Italian Society of Veterinarians of Companion Animals.
The aim of the CLWG was to develop a scientific-based consensus approach