Loading…
Comparison of the performance of laboratory tests in the diagnosis of feline infectious peritonitis
We compared the performance of clinicopathologic and molecular tests used in the antemortem diagnosis of feline infectious peritonitis (FIP). From 16 FIP and 14 non-FIP cats, we evaluated retrospectively the sensitivity, specificity, and likelihood ratios (LRs) of serum protein electrophoresis, α1-a...
Saved in:
Published in: | Journal of veterinary diagnostic investigation 2018-05, Vol.30 (3), p.459-463 |
---|---|
Main Authors: | , , , , , |
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Subjects: | |
Citations: | Items that this one cites Items that cite this one |
Online Access: | Get full text |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
cited_by | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c533t-81c6a5b3b5b635c6f420099379111ba42f8fb34a1c493f83dcee4d96ec44cc143 |
---|---|
cites | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c533t-81c6a5b3b5b635c6f420099379111ba42f8fb34a1c493f83dcee4d96ec44cc143 |
container_end_page | 463 |
container_issue | 3 |
container_start_page | 459 |
container_title | Journal of veterinary diagnostic investigation |
container_volume | 30 |
creator | Stranieri, Angelica Giordano, Alessia Paltrinieri, Saverio Giudice, Chiara Cannito, Valentina Lauzi, Stefania |
description | We compared the performance of clinicopathologic and molecular tests used in the antemortem diagnosis of feline infectious peritonitis (FIP). From 16 FIP and 14 non-FIP cats, we evaluated retrospectively the sensitivity, specificity, and likelihood ratios (LRs) of serum protein electrophoresis, α1-acid glycoprotein (AGP) on peripheral blood, screening reverse-transcription nested PCR (RT-nPCR) on the 3’–untranslated region (3’-UTR), and spike (S) gene sequencing on peripheral blood, body cavity effusions, and tissue, as well as body cavity cytology and delta total nucleated cell count (ΔTNC). Any of these tests on blood, and especially the molecular tests, may support or confirm a clinical diagnosis of FIP. A negative result does not exclude the disease except for AGP. Cytology, 3’-UTR PCR, and ΔTNC may confirm a clinical diagnosis on effusions; cytology or 3’-UTR PCR may exclude FIP. Conversely, S gene sequencing is not recommended based on the LRs. On tissues, S gene sequencing is preferable when histology is highly consistent with FIP, and 3’-UTR PCR when FIP is unlikely. Combining one test with high LR+ with one with low LR− (e.g., molecular tests and AGP on blood, ΔTNC and cytology in effusions) may improve the diagnostic power of the most used laboratory tests. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1177/1040638718756460 |
format | article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_6505812</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sage_id>10.1177_1040638718756460</sage_id><sourcerecordid>2176373991</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c533t-81c6a5b3b5b635c6f420099379111ba42f8fb34a1c493f83dcee4d96ec44cc143</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkc9rHCEcxSU0JJtt7zmVOfYyqd_xx4yXQljSphDIJTmL4-quYUan6gby38fJbpa2UAqC4vt8Hz4fQpeArwDa9itgijnpWuhaxinHJ2gBgpKaCsI_lHOR61k_RxcpPWHMGtbCGTpvBC0LkwXSqzBOKroUfBVslbemmky0IY7KazNfDaoPUeUQX6psUk6V82_Y2qmND8mlGbJmcN4UyRqdXdil2cXl4F126SM6tWpI5tNhX6LH7zcPq9v67v7Hz9X1Xa0ZIbnuQHPFetKznhOmuaUNxkKQVgBAr2hjO9sTqkCXeLYja20MXQtuNKVaAyVL9G3vO-360RTZ56gGOUU3qvgig3LyT8W7rdyEZ8kZZh00xeDLwSCGX7sSVo4uaTMMypuSSTbQctISIeD_KMZQumEEFxTvUR1DStHY44sAy7lG-XeNZeTz70mOA--9FaDeA0ltjHwKu-jLz_7b8BW856bP</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2001406530</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Comparison of the performance of laboratory tests in the diagnosis of feline infectious peritonitis</title><source>PubMed Central(OpenAccess)</source><source>SAGE</source><creator>Stranieri, Angelica ; Giordano, Alessia ; Paltrinieri, Saverio ; Giudice, Chiara ; Cannito, Valentina ; Lauzi, Stefania</creator><creatorcontrib>Stranieri, Angelica ; Giordano, Alessia ; Paltrinieri, Saverio ; Giudice, Chiara ; Cannito, Valentina ; Lauzi, Stefania</creatorcontrib><description>We compared the performance of clinicopathologic and molecular tests used in the antemortem diagnosis of feline infectious peritonitis (FIP). From 16 FIP and 14 non-FIP cats, we evaluated retrospectively the sensitivity, specificity, and likelihood ratios (LRs) of serum protein electrophoresis, α1-acid glycoprotein (AGP) on peripheral blood, screening reverse-transcription nested PCR (RT-nPCR) on the 3’–untranslated region (3’-UTR), and spike (S) gene sequencing on peripheral blood, body cavity effusions, and tissue, as well as body cavity cytology and delta total nucleated cell count (ΔTNC). Any of these tests on blood, and especially the molecular tests, may support or confirm a clinical diagnosis of FIP. A negative result does not exclude the disease except for AGP. Cytology, 3’-UTR PCR, and ΔTNC may confirm a clinical diagnosis on effusions; cytology or 3’-UTR PCR may exclude FIP. Conversely, S gene sequencing is not recommended based on the LRs. On tissues, S gene sequencing is preferable when histology is highly consistent with FIP, and 3’-UTR PCR when FIP is unlikely. Combining one test with high LR+ with one with low LR− (e.g., molecular tests and AGP on blood, ΔTNC and cytology in effusions) may improve the diagnostic power of the most used laboratory tests.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1040-6387</identifier><identifier>ISSN: 1943-4936</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1943-4936</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1177/1040638718756460</identifier><identifier>PMID: 29429403</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Los Angeles, CA: SAGE Publications</publisher><subject>Animals ; blood ; blood proteins ; Brief Communications ; Case-Control Studies ; Cats ; cell biology ; Cell Count - veterinary ; electrophoresis ; feline infectious peritonitis ; Feline Infectious Peritonitis - diagnosis ; Feline Infectious Peritonitis - pathology ; genes ; glycoproteins ; histology ; Retrospective Studies ; reverse transcription ; Sensitivity and Specificity</subject><ispartof>Journal of veterinary diagnostic investigation, 2018-05, Vol.30 (3), p.459-463</ispartof><rights>2018 The Author(s)</rights><rights>2018 The Author(s) 2018 American Association of Veterinary Laboratory Diagnosticians</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c533t-81c6a5b3b5b635c6f420099379111ba42f8fb34a1c493f83dcee4d96ec44cc143</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c533t-81c6a5b3b5b635c6f420099379111ba42f8fb34a1c493f83dcee4d96ec44cc143</cites><orcidid>0000-0001-7117-7987</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6505812/pdf/$$EPDF$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6505812/$$EHTML$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,724,777,781,882,27905,27906,53772,53774,79113</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29429403$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Stranieri, Angelica</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Giordano, Alessia</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Paltrinieri, Saverio</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Giudice, Chiara</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cannito, Valentina</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lauzi, Stefania</creatorcontrib><title>Comparison of the performance of laboratory tests in the diagnosis of feline infectious peritonitis</title><title>Journal of veterinary diagnostic investigation</title><addtitle>J Vet Diagn Invest</addtitle><description>We compared the performance of clinicopathologic and molecular tests used in the antemortem diagnosis of feline infectious peritonitis (FIP). From 16 FIP and 14 non-FIP cats, we evaluated retrospectively the sensitivity, specificity, and likelihood ratios (LRs) of serum protein electrophoresis, α1-acid glycoprotein (AGP) on peripheral blood, screening reverse-transcription nested PCR (RT-nPCR) on the 3’–untranslated region (3’-UTR), and spike (S) gene sequencing on peripheral blood, body cavity effusions, and tissue, as well as body cavity cytology and delta total nucleated cell count (ΔTNC). Any of these tests on blood, and especially the molecular tests, may support or confirm a clinical diagnosis of FIP. A negative result does not exclude the disease except for AGP. Cytology, 3’-UTR PCR, and ΔTNC may confirm a clinical diagnosis on effusions; cytology or 3’-UTR PCR may exclude FIP. Conversely, S gene sequencing is not recommended based on the LRs. On tissues, S gene sequencing is preferable when histology is highly consistent with FIP, and 3’-UTR PCR when FIP is unlikely. Combining one test with high LR+ with one with low LR− (e.g., molecular tests and AGP on blood, ΔTNC and cytology in effusions) may improve the diagnostic power of the most used laboratory tests.</description><subject>Animals</subject><subject>blood</subject><subject>blood proteins</subject><subject>Brief Communications</subject><subject>Case-Control Studies</subject><subject>Cats</subject><subject>cell biology</subject><subject>Cell Count - veterinary</subject><subject>electrophoresis</subject><subject>feline infectious peritonitis</subject><subject>Feline Infectious Peritonitis - diagnosis</subject><subject>Feline Infectious Peritonitis - pathology</subject><subject>genes</subject><subject>glycoproteins</subject><subject>histology</subject><subject>Retrospective Studies</subject><subject>reverse transcription</subject><subject>Sensitivity and Specificity</subject><issn>1040-6387</issn><issn>1943-4936</issn><issn>1943-4936</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2018</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNqFkc9rHCEcxSU0JJtt7zmVOfYyqd_xx4yXQljSphDIJTmL4-quYUan6gby38fJbpa2UAqC4vt8Hz4fQpeArwDa9itgijnpWuhaxinHJ2gBgpKaCsI_lHOR61k_RxcpPWHMGtbCGTpvBC0LkwXSqzBOKroUfBVslbemmky0IY7KazNfDaoPUeUQX6psUk6V82_Y2qmND8mlGbJmcN4UyRqdXdil2cXl4F126SM6tWpI5tNhX6LH7zcPq9v67v7Hz9X1Xa0ZIbnuQHPFetKznhOmuaUNxkKQVgBAr2hjO9sTqkCXeLYja20MXQtuNKVaAyVL9G3vO-360RTZ56gGOUU3qvgig3LyT8W7rdyEZ8kZZh00xeDLwSCGX7sSVo4uaTMMypuSSTbQctISIeD_KMZQumEEFxTvUR1DStHY44sAy7lG-XeNZeTz70mOA--9FaDeA0ltjHwKu-jLz_7b8BW856bP</recordid><startdate>20180501</startdate><enddate>20180501</enddate><creator>Stranieri, Angelica</creator><creator>Giordano, Alessia</creator><creator>Paltrinieri, Saverio</creator><creator>Giudice, Chiara</creator><creator>Cannito, Valentina</creator><creator>Lauzi, Stefania</creator><general>SAGE Publications</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>7S9</scope><scope>L.6</scope><scope>5PM</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7117-7987</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20180501</creationdate><title>Comparison of the performance of laboratory tests in the diagnosis of feline infectious peritonitis</title><author>Stranieri, Angelica ; Giordano, Alessia ; Paltrinieri, Saverio ; Giudice, Chiara ; Cannito, Valentina ; Lauzi, Stefania</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c533t-81c6a5b3b5b635c6f420099379111ba42f8fb34a1c493f83dcee4d96ec44cc143</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2018</creationdate><topic>Animals</topic><topic>blood</topic><topic>blood proteins</topic><topic>Brief Communications</topic><topic>Case-Control Studies</topic><topic>Cats</topic><topic>cell biology</topic><topic>Cell Count - veterinary</topic><topic>electrophoresis</topic><topic>feline infectious peritonitis</topic><topic>Feline Infectious Peritonitis - diagnosis</topic><topic>Feline Infectious Peritonitis - pathology</topic><topic>genes</topic><topic>glycoproteins</topic><topic>histology</topic><topic>Retrospective Studies</topic><topic>reverse transcription</topic><topic>Sensitivity and Specificity</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Stranieri, Angelica</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Giordano, Alessia</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Paltrinieri, Saverio</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Giudice, Chiara</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cannito, Valentina</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lauzi, Stefania</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>AGRICOLA</collection><collection>AGRICOLA - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>Journal of veterinary diagnostic investigation</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Stranieri, Angelica</au><au>Giordano, Alessia</au><au>Paltrinieri, Saverio</au><au>Giudice, Chiara</au><au>Cannito, Valentina</au><au>Lauzi, Stefania</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Comparison of the performance of laboratory tests in the diagnosis of feline infectious peritonitis</atitle><jtitle>Journal of veterinary diagnostic investigation</jtitle><addtitle>J Vet Diagn Invest</addtitle><date>2018-05-01</date><risdate>2018</risdate><volume>30</volume><issue>3</issue><spage>459</spage><epage>463</epage><pages>459-463</pages><issn>1040-6387</issn><issn>1943-4936</issn><eissn>1943-4936</eissn><abstract>We compared the performance of clinicopathologic and molecular tests used in the antemortem diagnosis of feline infectious peritonitis (FIP). From 16 FIP and 14 non-FIP cats, we evaluated retrospectively the sensitivity, specificity, and likelihood ratios (LRs) of serum protein electrophoresis, α1-acid glycoprotein (AGP) on peripheral blood, screening reverse-transcription nested PCR (RT-nPCR) on the 3’–untranslated region (3’-UTR), and spike (S) gene sequencing on peripheral blood, body cavity effusions, and tissue, as well as body cavity cytology and delta total nucleated cell count (ΔTNC). Any of these tests on blood, and especially the molecular tests, may support or confirm a clinical diagnosis of FIP. A negative result does not exclude the disease except for AGP. Cytology, 3’-UTR PCR, and ΔTNC may confirm a clinical diagnosis on effusions; cytology or 3’-UTR PCR may exclude FIP. Conversely, S gene sequencing is not recommended based on the LRs. On tissues, S gene sequencing is preferable when histology is highly consistent with FIP, and 3’-UTR PCR when FIP is unlikely. Combining one test with high LR+ with one with low LR− (e.g., molecular tests and AGP on blood, ΔTNC and cytology in effusions) may improve the diagnostic power of the most used laboratory tests.</abstract><cop>Los Angeles, CA</cop><pub>SAGE Publications</pub><pmid>29429403</pmid><doi>10.1177/1040638718756460</doi><tpages>5</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7117-7987</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 1040-6387 |
ispartof | Journal of veterinary diagnostic investigation, 2018-05, Vol.30 (3), p.459-463 |
issn | 1040-6387 1943-4936 1943-4936 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_6505812 |
source | PubMed Central(OpenAccess); SAGE |
subjects | Animals blood blood proteins Brief Communications Case-Control Studies Cats cell biology Cell Count - veterinary electrophoresis feline infectious peritonitis Feline Infectious Peritonitis - diagnosis Feline Infectious Peritonitis - pathology genes glycoproteins histology Retrospective Studies reverse transcription Sensitivity and Specificity |
title | Comparison of the performance of laboratory tests in the diagnosis of feline infectious peritonitis |
url | http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-19T01%3A30%3A00IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Comparison%20of%20the%20performance%20of%20laboratory%20tests%20in%20the%20diagnosis%20of%20feline%20infectious%20peritonitis&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20veterinary%20diagnostic%20investigation&rft.au=Stranieri,%20Angelica&rft.date=2018-05-01&rft.volume=30&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=459&rft.epage=463&rft.pages=459-463&rft.issn=1040-6387&rft.eissn=1943-4936&rft_id=info:doi/10.1177/1040638718756460&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_pubme%3E2176373991%3C/proquest_pubme%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c533t-81c6a5b3b5b635c6f420099379111ba42f8fb34a1c493f83dcee4d96ec44cc143%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2001406530&rft_id=info:pmid/29429403&rft_sage_id=10.1177_1040638718756460&rfr_iscdi=true |