Dive into the Latest Scoop with Vet Candy Journal Club! Keeping up with the latest vet journals just got way cooler with us!

Check out these three hot takes from the latest peer-reviewed vet journal articles. Stay sharp, stay informed!

Evaluation of drugs used to treat FIP

Let’s start with a deep dive into the article, “Quality assessment and characterization of unregulated antiviral drugs for feline infectious peritonitis: implications for treatment, safety, and efficacy” from the American Journal of Veterinary Research. Shoutout to Megan E Browning of Department of Medicinal Chemistry, School of Pharmacy, University of Utah who was a co-author on the study. This study has raised significant concerns about the quality of unregulated antiviral drugs used to treat feline infectious peritonitis (FIP), a deadly cat disease lacking FDA-approved treatments.

Researchers embarked on a mission to examine the purity and composition of these drugs, sourced from multiple companies, to ensure the safety and efficacy of the treatment given to cats. The research involved analyzing 30 vials of GS-441524 from 17 brands and 5 vials of GC376 from one brand, comparing them against control standards from established chemical companies. Using advanced techniques like high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) and mass spectrometry, the team conducted a thorough examination of these drugs.

The results were startling. While GS-441524 samples mostly showed consistent purity, some were found to be up to 25% more concentrated than labeled. More alarmingly, none of the GC376 vials contained the correct medication, revealing a serious issue in medication accuracy, which could lead to harmful side effects in cats. This investigation highlights a critical need for quality control in pet medications and underscores the importance of careful drug selection and verification in veterinary medicine. The findings serve as a crucial reminder of the vigilance needed to protect our pets' health and well-being.

New occult blood test

Up next, we're checking out “Rectally obtained fecal samples can be used for fecal occult blood testing in dogs, and fecal immunochemical tests do not detect canine or feline blood’from the American Journal of Veterinary Research. Kudos to Kelly Chappell, from the College of Veterinary Medicine at Iowa State University. for spearheading this study. Let's explore what this means for our clients. In a novel veterinary study, researchers set out to uncover two key aspects of canine and feline health testing. Firstly, they investigated whether the method of fecal sample collection (naturally voided versus obtained via digital rectal examination) influenced the outcomes of fecal occult blood tests in dogs.

Secondly, they aimed to determine the effectiveness of human fecal hemoglobin immunochemical tests in detecting blood in dog and cat samples. The study involved 308 dogs, both healthy and ill, from private owners. The research team conducted guaiac Fecal occult blood tests on paired fecal samples - one collected naturally and the other obtained rectally. They employed the kappa statistic to evaluate the agreement between the two collection methods. Additionally, a multivariate regression model helped identify factors linked to positive fecal occult blood tests results.

The study also tested two fecal immunochemical tests, namely Hemosure One Step and OC-Light S, using diluted human, canine, and feline blood. The findings were intriguing. The agreement between voided and rectally obtained samples for FOB positivity was substantial (kappa value = 0.80), with a 92.5% concordance rate. Interestingly, only a small number of dogs (13 out of 308) tested negative with voided samples but positive with rectal samples. Multivariate analysis revealed that dogs with gastrointestinal diseases were more likely to have positive fecal occult blood tests results, while heavier dogs were less likely.

Variables like health status, fasting status, NSAID use, and age showed associations in univariate analysis but not in the multivariate model. Crucially, the study found that human fecal immunochemical tests failed to detect canine or feline blood at any concentration, although they worked as expected with human blood. The clinical implications of these findings are significant. They suggest that rectally obtained fecal samples are reliable for conducting Fecal occult blood tests in dogs. However, the ineffectiveness of human fecal immunochemical tests in detecting blood in pets indicates a need for further evaluation of other available tests for animal use. This research not only offers insights into better diagnostic practices but also raises important questions about the adaptability of human medical tests for veterinary purposes.

Smart microchips

Last but not least, we're checking out ‘Correlation of temperature-sensing microchip and rectal temperature measurements in cats” from the Journal, Frontiers in Veterinary Sciences. Big props to lead author, Marta Goig from MSD Animal Health, for this intriguing research. Rectal temperature measurement has long been considered the gold standard for assessing body temperature in mammals, including our feline friends. However, this method is not without its drawbacks, particularly for cats, as it can cause stress and defensive behavior. This has led to a growing demand for more stress-free clinical techniques that still provide accurate medical care. A novel approach involves using subcutaneous temperature-sensing identification microchips, which not only comply with legal requirements but also offer a measure of subcutaneous temperature. A recent clinical study set out to evaluate the effectiveness of these microchips by comparing subcutaneous temperature with rectal temperature in different cat populations. The study included 58 normal cats, 26 hospitalized cats, and 36 sedated or anesthetized cats. Each cat underwent three temperature readings using both the subcutaneous temperature and rectal temperature methods. The research focused on determining the correlation and differences between subcutaneous temperature and Rectal temperature for each individual cat and across each group. The results were promising. A strong positive correlation was found between subcutaneous temperature and rectal temperature across all groups, with correlation coefficients ranging from 0.7 to 1.0, which is statistically significant. While there were mean differences between the readings, these differences were consistently small and not biologically significant. The narrow limits of agreement between measurements suggest that subcutaneous temperature could be an acceptable alternative in cats. The study concludes that subcutaneous temperature, as measured by subcutaneous temperature-sensing microchips, could potentially offer a less stressful and more convenient alternative for assessing body temperature in cats. However, it's important to note that this study predominantly involved normothermic animals. To fully validate the efficacy of subcutaneous temperature measurements, further research involving larger groups of cats in varying health conditions is necessary. This would help to better understand trends and assess variation over time, paving the way for more comfortable and stress-free veterinary care.