CT features of cutaneous and subcutaneous canine mast cell tumors and utility of conventional and indirect lymphography to detect clinically unknown mast cell tumors and to map the sentinel lymph nodes.

Computed tomography is frequently used to stage canine mast cell tumors (MCTs). The aims of this prospective, observational study were to describe the CT features of MCTs, to evaluate the performance of CT in detecting additional or incidental MCTs, to distinguish between cutaneous (cMCT) or subcutaneous (scMCT) MCTs, and to identify one or multiple sentinel lymph nodes (SLNs) by indirect CT lymphography (ICTL). Seventy-two dogs affected by 111 MCTs were included. The recorded parameters were: shape, size, attenuation (Hounsfield units [HU]), location (cutaneous or subcutaneous), and presence of fat stranding. The SLNs were compared with the regional lymph nodes and supplementary MCTs were registered. Mast cell tumors mostly appeared with well-defined margins (89%), round/oval shape (71%), homogeneous enhancement (90%) with a mean postcontrast density of 62.0 ± 23.4 HU and associated with fat stranding (43%). Cutaneous mast cell tumors were more frequently round (P = .003), whereas scMCTs were oval (P = .011) with a larger mean maximal diameter (2.91 ± 1.57 cm vs 1.46 ± 1.28 cm, P = .002) and more feeding vessels (77% vs 39% P = .044). Compared with histopathology, CT accuracy in differentiating cMCTs and sMCTs was 57%, with an interobserver agreement of 88% (three reviewers). Indirect CT lymphography showed the SLN in 82 of 85 (97%) cases, 32% of them not corresponding to the regional node. CT showed additional or incidental MCTs in 23 of 72 (32%) dogs. In conclusion, the common CT appearance of canine cMCTs and scMCTs is reported with some statistical differences between the two categories. CT is useful in identifying clinically undetected MCTs and SLNs, although it shows low accuracy in distinguishing between cMCT and scMCT.

Pre-analytical and analytical variability of reticulocyte counts in dogs.

BACKGROUND: Automated fluorescence-based haematology analysers are now available for reticulocyte enumeration in veterinary medicine, but manual counting is still largely used. This study aimed to evaluate potential sources of analytical and pre-analytical errors when performing automated and manual counts. METHODS: Automated and two-operator double-blind manual reticulocyte counts were performed on 15 blood samples. The intra-assay variation of the automated and manual counts and the interoperator variation in the manual counts were then calculated. In addition, the effects of storage were evaluated using samples refrigerated at 4°C or stored at room temperature for 2, 4, 12, 24, 48 or 72 hours after sampling. RESULTS: Intra-assay coefficients of variation were lower for automated counts than for manual counts. Comparison between automated and mean total manual reticulocyte count showed no significant differences. In both refrigerated samples and those stored at room temperature, an increase in reticulocyte count was recorded only after 72 hours. Staining artefacts occurred only in one stored sample counted manually. LIMITATIONS: The presence of cytoplasmic particles other than RNA can cause misinterpretation of cells, leading to an erroneous reticulocyte count. CONCLUSION: The use of an automated analyser is preferable for reticulocyte enumeration in dogs. Common storage conditions seem to minimally affect reticulocyte evaluation; however, it is recommended to perform the analysis as soon as possible after sampling.

Analytical variability and uncertainty in canine leukocyte ratios obtained with manual counts.

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to determine the analytical imprecision of calculated neutrophil to lymphocyte (NLR) and lymphocyte to monocyte ratios generated from manual differential white blood cell (WBC) counts in peripheral blood smears, and to describe how to report the uncertainty around a single WBC ratio result. No information on the analytical imprecision of WBC ratios in dogs is available. METHODS: Coefficient of variations (CVs) of paired readings of one operator on 105 smears (intraoperator variability) and of three operators on 301 smears (interoperator variability) were calculated. The interoperator agreement was examined with the Fleiss' kappa coefficient (κ). Observed total errors (TEos), expanded measurement of uncertainty (EMU) and reporting intervals (RIs) were also calculated. RESULTS: Median CVs ranged from 3.14 to 28.28 (intraoperator) and from 5.39 to 53.85 (interoperator). No agreement among operators was found around the cut-offs. TEos were higher than allowable total errors in 32%-88% of smears. EMU ranged from 0.10 to 1.13. According to the RI, the calculated WBC ratios should be rounded to the nearest 10. CONCLUSION: WBC ratios should be interpreted cautiously in dogs. The EMU should be reported to make the clinician aware of the uncertainty of these parameters. For example, an NLR result of 17 is needed to have high confidence that the result is above a cut-off of 6.

A case of "misplaced" Tritrichomonas foetus infection in a dog in Northern Italy.

An 8-year-old, spayed female Rottweiler dog, under immunosuppressant treatment for protein-losing enteropathy (PLE) and intestinal lymphangiectasia, was presented for anorexia, poor general conditions and episodes of diarrhea. A subcutaneous mass between the caudal abdominal mammary glands was found. A fine-needle aspiration cytology was performed and revealed the presence of inflammatory cells mixed with pear- or round-shaped microorganisms with cytomorphological features of flagellated protozoan trophozoites, belonging to Trichomonadida order. The final diagnosis of Tritrichomonas foetus infection was achieved with molecular analysis (Real-Time PCR) and sequencing. T. foetus has often been reported as a pathogenic agent in cattle and cats, and rarely reported in dogs, where its pathogenetic role is poorly understood. To the author's knowledge, this is the first case of T. foetus infection described in a location different from the gastrointestinal tract in a dog.