Lymphangiosarcoma in 12 dogs: a case series (1998–2013)

Lymphangiosarcoma (LAS) is an uncommon malignant neoplasia arising from lymphatic endothelium; little information exists regarding therapy. Single institutional retrospective review for canine LAS histopathology diagnoses over a 15‐year period yielded 12 dogs. Ten dogs were presented for a mass and/or swelling at cervical, trunk or limb regions. Prior to diagnosis, 10 dogs received empiric wound therapy. Cytology performed in 10 consisted of mild inflammation. Survival ranged from 60, 168 and 876 days for three dogs with palliation; 90 days with prednisone in one; 182 days with chemotherapy in one; 240, 267, 487, 630 and 941 days for five receiving surgery; and 574 days for one receiving surgery, radiation and chemotherapy. One dog is alive with recurrence at 243 days following surgery and carboplatin chemotherapy. Clinical improvement existed in LAS dogs receiving multimodal therapies. Early tissue biopsies are recommended for progressive oedematous lesions of unknown origin.     

Diagnosing feline immunodeficiency virus (FIV) infection in FIV-vaccinated and FIV-unvaccinated cats using saliva

We recently showed that two immunochromatography point-of-care FIV antibody test kits (Witness FeLV/FIV and Anigen Rapid FIV/FeLV) were able to correctly assign FIV infection status, irrespective of FIV vaccination history, using whole blood as the diagnostic specimen. A third FIV antibody test kit, SNAP FIV/FeLV Combo (an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay [ELISA]), was unable to differentiate antibodies produced in response to FIV vaccination from those incited by FIV infection. The aim of this study was to determine if saliva is a suitable diagnostic specimen using the same well characterized feline cohort. FIV infection status of these cats had been determined previously using a combination of serology, polymerase chain reaction (PCR) testing and virus isolation. This final assignment was then compared to results obtained using saliva as the diagnostic specimen utilizing the same three point-of-care FIV antibody test kits and commercially available PCR assay (FIV RealPCR). In a population of cats where one third (117/356; 33%) were FIV-vaccinated, both immunochromatography test kits accurately diagnosed FIV infection using saliva via a centrifugation method, irrespective of FIV vaccination history. For FIV diagnosis using saliva, the specificity of Anigen Rapid FIV/FeLV and Witness FeLV/FIV was 100%, while the sensitivity of these kits was 96% and 92% respectively. SNAP FIV/FeLV Combo had a specificity of 98% and sensitivity of 44%, while FIV RealPCR testing had a specificity of 100% and sensitivity of 72% using saliva. A revised direct method of saliva testing was trialed on a subset of FIV-infected cats (n = 14), resulting in 14, 7 and 0 FIV positive results using Anigen Rapid FIV/FeLV, Witness FeLV/FIV and SNAP FIV/FeLV Combo, respectively. These results demonstrate that saliva can be used to diagnose FIV infection, irrespective of FIV vaccination history, using either a centrifugation method (Anigen Rapid FIV/FeLV and Witness FeLV/FIV) or a direct method (Anigen Rapid FIV/FeLV). Collection of a saliva specimen therefore provides an acceptable alternative to venipuncture (i) in fractious cats where saliva may be easier to obtain than whole blood, (ii) in settings when a veterinarian or trained technician is unavailable to collect blood and (iii) in shelters where FIV testing is undertaken prior to adoption but additional blood testing is not required.     

Apparent seroprevalence,isolation and identification of risk factors for brucellosis among dairy cattle in Goa,India

Brucellosis is a highly contagious zoonotic infection affecting livestock and human beings. The disease has been reported worldwide except in few countries where it has been eradicated. The prevalence of brucellosis among cattle from 11 farms having a history of abortions was studied. A total of 481 samples comprising of blood, milk, vaginal swabs, vaginal discharges, placental tissues and fetal tissues were collected from 296 animals. Clinical samples were processed for the isolation of Brucella. Serum samples (n = 296) were tested by Rose Bengal Plate Test (RBPT) and indirect ELISA. A total of 90 (30.40%) and 123 (41.55%) samples were positive by RBPT and indirect ELISA, respectively. Also 27.02% samples were positive by both the tests. Brucella isolates (n = 8) were recovered from clinical samples using Brucella selective media. All the isolates demonstrated PCR amplification for the bcsp31 and IS711 genes. Amplification of Brucella abortus specific primer was demonstrated by all the isolates in AMOS PCR indicating isolates to be of either B. abortus biotype 1, 2 or 4. Risk factors for transmission of brucellosis among cattle population were studied by field surveys. It was observed that lack of awareness about brucellosis (OR = 8.739, P = 0.138) and inadequate floor space (OR = 0.278, P = 0.128) were crucial risk factors for transmission of bovine brucellosis.     

ASVCP guidelines: quality assurance for portable blood glucose meter (glucometer) use in veterinary medicine

Portable blood glucose meters (PBGM, glucometers) are a convenient, cost effective, and quick means to assess patient blood glucose concentration. The number of commercially available PBGM is constantly increasing, making it challenging to determine whether certain glucometers may have benefits over others for veterinary testing. The challenge in selection of an appropriate glucometer from a quality perspective is compounded by the variety of analytic methods used to quantify glucose concentrations and disparate statistical analysis in many published studies. These guidelines were developed as part of the ASVCP QALS committee response to establish recommendations to improve the quality of testing using point‐of‐care testing (POCT) handheld and benchtop devices in veterinary medicine. They are intended for clinical pathologists and laboratory professionals to provide them with background knowledge and specific recommendations for quality assurance (QA) and quality control (QC), and to serve as a resource to assist the provision of advice to veterinarians and technicians to improve the quality of results obtained when using PBGM. These guidelines are not intended to be all‐inclusive; rather they provide a minimum standard for management of PBGM in the veterinary setting.