Evaluation of a Catalase‐Based Urine Test for the Detection of Urinary Tract Infection in Dogs and Cats

• Published in: Journal of veterinary internal medicine 2013-11, Vol.27 (6), p.1379-1384
• Main Authors: Kvitko-White, H.L., Cook, A.K., Nabity, M.B., Zhang, S., Lawhon, S.D.
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Animals; Antimicrobial agents; Cat Diseases - microbiology; Cat Diseases - urine; Catalase - urine; Cats; Diabetes; Dog Diseases - microbiology; Dog Diseases - urine; Dogs; Predictive Value of Tests; Prospective Studies; Sensitivity and Specificity; Urinalysis; Urinary tract diseases; Urinary tract infection; Urinary tract infections; Urinary Tract Infections - microbiology; Urinary Tract Infections - urine; Urinary Tract Infections - veterinary; Urine; Urine catalase; Uriscreen; Urogenital system; Veterinary medicine
• ISSN: 0891-6640; 1939-1676
• DOI: 10.1111/jvim.12196

BACKGROUND: Bacterial infection of the urinary tract is a common disorder in dogs and cats. Although microscopic examination of urine sediment is routinely used to screen for infection, this test can lack sensitivity or require expertise. A reliable in‐clinic screening test would be a useful adjunct for the identification of dogs and cats with bacterial urinary tract infection (UTI). HYPOTHESIS: That a catalase‐based urine test (Accutest Uriscreen™) is a more sensitive screening test for UTI in dogs and cats than urine microscopic sediment examination. ANIMALS: One hundred and sixty client‐owned dogs and cats. METHODS: Surplus urine from animals presented to a veterinary teaching hospital was used in this prospective observational study. A routine urinalysis, aerobic bacterial culture, and the Uriscreen test were performed on cystocentesis samples. Sensitivity and specificity with 95% confidence intervals and positive and negative likelihood ratios were calculated for Uriscreen and microscopic sediment examination using culture results as the gold standard. RESULTS: Bacterial culture was positive in 27/165 (16.4%) samples. The sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative likelihood ratios for the Uriscreen were 89%, 71%, 3.0, and 0.15, respectively. Sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative likelihood ratios for urine sediment microscopic examination were 78%, 90%, 7.8, and 0.24, respectively. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPORTANCE: The Uriscreen is a more sensitive screening test for UTI in dogs and cats than sediment examination; however, the urine sediment examination was more specific. A negative Uriscreen result helps exclude UTI; however, urine bacterial culture is still necessary to exclude or confirm UTI in all cases.