Clinicopathological findings of FeLV- positive cats at a secondary referral center in Florida, USA (2008-2019).

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to describe the seroprevalence, presenting complaint, clinicopathological changes, co-morbidities and outcomes of feline leukemia virus positive cats presented to a specialty referral center in Florida, USA. METHODS: In this retrospective study, medical records of 8050 cats presented to a private referral center from August 2008 to September 2019 were reviewed. Inclusion criteria required was a positive result for feline leukemia virus by point-of-care antigen testing or immunofluorescence assay. RESULTS: Forty-one cases met the inclusion criteria. Of 2002 cats that were tested, 41 cats (2%) met the inclusion criteria. One cat had a negative point of care antigen test result and positive bone marrow IFA result. The mean age at diagnosis was 9 years. The main reasons for presentation were abnormal complete blood cell count results (35%), followed by pleural effusion (18%), and anorexia (15%). The most common laboratory abnormalities included anaemia (71%), of which 74% had a nonregenerative anemia, thrombocytopenia (52%), elevated aspartate aminotransferase (50%), hyperbilirubinemia (35%), and hypokalemia (35%). Seven percent of cats (3/41) were also positive for feline immunodeficiency virus. The most common diagnoses were neoplasia (76%) and bone marrow disorders (12%). Cats with neoplasia were significantly younger. Survival to discharge was 88%. CONCLUSION AND RELEVANCE: Results of this study show that feline leukemia virus is uncommon in secondary referral center, even if this represents a population of unhealthy cats. The most common associated diagnosis was neoplasia, which was more likely to be seen in younger cats (< 4 years of age). The mean age of cats positive for feline leukemia virus was also older than previously published data. These findings support the current guidelines which indicate that cats presented with clinical illness should be tested for FeLV at the time of presentation.

Comparison of four different hematocrit assays and the effect of albumin on their measurements.

Clinical decisions are influenced by hematocrit values. Centrifugation (reference standard), conductivity, optical and impedance methods are often used interchangeably to measure hematocrit. The effects of albumin, which are known to affect conductivity methods, have not been evaluated for limits of agreement (LOA) between hematocrit assays in small animals. Canine venous blood was collected from 74 clinical cases and measured by centrifugation (n = 72), conductivity (n = 73), impedance (n = 24) and optical (n = 50) methods. Bland-Altman analysis determined bias (± SD) and 95% LOA between methods. There was a statistically significant difference between centrifugation hematocrit values and values obtained via conductivity (p < 0.0001), optical (p < 0.0001), and impedance (p = 0.0082) methods. The conductivity method underestimated hematocrit by 2.1 ± 2.9% (95% LOA -3.54 to 7.88), the optical method by 3.1 ± 3.6% (95% LOA -4.0 to 10.2), and the impedance method by 2.3 ± 3.7% (95% LOA -5 to 9.6) when compared to centrifuged hematocrit values. The hematocrit difference between conductivity and centrifugation methods was statistically different for low (4%, 0-5%), within reference limits (3%, -5 to 8%), and high (2%, -2 to 5%) albumin values, respectively (p = 0.02), with post-hoc analysis demonstrating that the difference occurred between the low and high albumin groups. This study confirms that albumin values outside reference limits can affect the conductivity method and that hematocrit values obtained via conductivity, optical and impedance methods underestimate values obtained via centrifugation. Therefore, the hematocrit methods cannot be used interchangeably. The wide limits of agreement also demonstrates that care must be taken when making clinical decisions with different hematocrit methodologies.

Development of a computerized intervertebral motion analysis of the cervical spine for clinical application.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to develop a measurement method that could be implemented in chiropractic for the evaluation of angular and translational intervertebral motion of the cervical spine. METHODS: Flexion-extension radiographs were digitized with a scanner at a ratio of 1:1 and imported into a software, allowing segmental motion measurements. The measurements were obtained by selecting the most anteroinferior point and the most posteroinferior point of a vertebral body (anterior and posterior arch, respectively, for C1), with the origin of the reference frame set at the most posteroinferior point of the vertebral body below. The same procedure was performed for both the flexion and extension radiographs, and the coordinates of the 2 points were used to calculate the angular movement and the translation between the 2 vertebrae. RESULTS: This method provides a measure of intervertebral angular and translational movement. It uses a different reference frame for each joint instead of the same reference frame for all joints and thus provides a measure of motion in the plane of each articulation. The calculated values obtained are comparable to other studies on intervertebral motion and support further development to validate the method. CONCLUSION: The present study proposes a computerized procedure to evaluate intervertebral motion of the cervical spine. This procedure needs to be validated with a reliability study but could provide a valuable tool for doctors of chiropractic and further spinal research.