Accuracy of a Mouse Bioassay for the Diagnosis of Botulism in Horses.

BACKGROUND: The laboratory diagnosis of botulism in horses traditionally has relied upon the mouse bioassay (MBA). The accuracy of this test for the diagnosis of botulism in horses is unknown. HYPOTHESIS/OBJECTIVES: Our goal was to determine the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of the MBA on laboratory-processed fecal and gastrointestinal samples for foals and adult horses. ANIMALS: Cases included all horses with a final clinical diagnosis of botulism that were admitted between 1986 and 2011 and had MBA testing performed. Controls included horses without botulism that were admitted during the same time period and had MBA testing performed. METHODS: Retrospective study. Horses suspected of having botulism had fecal or (less commonly) gastrointestinal content samples tested using MBA. For every hospitalized botulism suspect, control samples were obtained from ≥1 additional hospitalized horses not suspected to have botulism. RESULTS: One hundred and twenty-nine adult horses and 253 adult controls were identified. Overall sensitivity of the MBA was only 32% but specificity was 97%. Forty-three foal cases and 21 foal controls were evaluated; sensitivity of the MBA was 53% and specificity was 100%. Positive predictive value was substantially higher (100% for foals and 89% for adults) than negative predictive value (51% for foals and 67% for adults). CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPORTANCE: Mouse bioassay has low sensitivity but high specificity for the diagnosis of botulism in horses. Positive results are highly suggestive of botulism but negative results do not exclude the diagnosis. Unaffected horses and foals rarely shed C. botulinum in their feces.

Outcome of adult horses with botulism treated at a veterinary hospital: 92 cases (1989-2013).

BACKGROUND: There are no studies evaluating a large population of adult horses treated for botulism. Reported survival rates in outbreak situations are low; however, many horses in outbreaks do not receive treatment. HYPOTHESIS/OBJECTIVES: That adult horses treated at a veterinary hospital would have improved survival compared to outbreak situations. Additional aims included identification of predictors of nonsurvival. ANIMALS: All horses greater than 6 months of age with a final diagnosis of botulism admitted to a veterinary teaching hospital between 1989 and 2013 were included. METHODS: Retrospective study. Historical, admission, and hospitalization data were retrieved from medical records and associations between variables and nonsurvival were identified using logistic regression. Two multivariable models were developed pertaining to (1) information available at admission and (2) clinical findings during hospitalization. RESULTS: Ninety-two records met inclusion criteria. Retained variables for the two models indicated that higher rectal temperature (OR, 1.94; CI, 1.19-3.17) and dysphagia (OR, 4.04; CI, 1.01-16.17) observed at admission increased the odds of survival, as did treatment with antitoxin (OR, 121.30; CI, 9.94-1,480.65). Horses with abnormal respiratory effort or inability to stand had decreased odds of survival. Overall survival was 48% but was significantly higher (67%, P = .011) for horses that arrived standing, and even higher (95%, P < .001) for horses that remained able to stand throughout hospitalization. Complications occurred in 62% of horses but were not associated with nonsurvival. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPORTANCE: Horses that lose the ability to stand have a poor chance of survival. Complications are common in treated horses but do not reduce survival.

Oral pilocarpine for post-irradiation xerostomia in patients with head and neck cancer.

BACKGROUND AND METHODS: We evaluated pilocarpine hydrochloride for the treatment of radiation-induced xerostomia, a common complication of irradiation of the head and neck. A prospective, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial was undertaken to test the safety and efficacy of pilocarpine, particularly in reversing the decrease in the production of saliva and other manifestations of xerostomia. Patients received either placebo or pilocarpine (5 mg or 10 mg orally three times a day) for 12 weeks and were evaluated at base line and every 4 weeks. RESULTS: We studied 207 patients who had each received > or = 4000 cGy of radiation to the head and neck. In the patients receiving the 5-mg dose of pilocarpine, oral dryness improved in 44 percent, as compared with 25 percent of the patients receiving placebo (P = 0.027). There was overall improvement in 54 percent of the 5-mg group as compared with 25 percent of the placebo group (P = 0.003), and 31 percent of the 5-mg group had improved comfort of the mouth and tongue, as compared with 10 percent of the placebo group (P = 0.002). Speaking ability improved in 33 percent of the 5-mg group as compared with 18 percent of the placebo group (P = 0.037). Saliva production was improved, but it did not correlate with symptomatic relief. There were comparable improvements in the group receiving the 10-mg dose. The primary adverse effect was sweating, in addition to other minor cholinergic effects. Six and 29 percent of the patients in the 5-mg and 10-mg groups, respectively, withdrew from the study because of adverse effects. There were no serious adverse effects related to pilocarpine. CONCLUSIONS: Pilocarpine improved saliva production and relieved symptoms of xerostomia after irradiation for cancer of the head and neck, with minor side effects that were predominantly limited to sweating.