Comparison of Different Tests to Diagnose Feline Infectious Peritonitis

Сравнение различных тестов для диагностики инфекционного перитонита кошек
M. Reinacher, W. Hermanns, Katrin Hartmann, Dana Cole, Christina Binder, Johannes Hirschberger, Simone Schroo, J. W. Frost, Herman Egberink, Hans Lutz
2003-01-01

Rivalta's testanti-coronavirus antibodiesfeline infectious peritonitisimmunofluorescence stainingreverse-transcription PCR
Clinical data from 488 cats (1979–2000) with histopathologically confirmed feline infectious peritonitis (FIP) and 620 comparable controls were evaluated retrospectively to assess the value of several diagnostic tests frequently used in the evaluation of cats with suspected FIP. Diagnostic utility of serum albumin to globulin ratio for the diagnosis of FIP was greater than of the utility of serum total protein and -/-globulin concentrations. Diagnostic utility of these variables was higher when performed on effusion. On effusion, positive and negative predictive values of Rivalta's test, a test that distinguishes between exudates and transudates (0.86 and 0.97), anti-coronavirus antibody detection (0.90 and 0.79), and immunofluorescence staining of coronavirus antigen in macrophages (1.00 and 0.57) were investigated. The positive and negative predictive values of presence of anti-coronavirus antibodies were 0.44 and 0.90, respectively, antibody concentrations (1:1,600) were 0.94 and 0.88, presence of immune complexes measured by a competitive enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay were 0.67 and 0.84, and detection of viral RNA by serum reverse-transcrip-tase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) were 0.90 and 0.47. Effusion RT-PCR was performed in 6 cats; it was positive in all 5 cats with FIP and negative in the cat with another disease. Diagnostic assays on the fluid in cats with body effusion had good predictive values. Definitive diagnosis of FIP on the basis of measurement of various variables in serum was not possible. Serum tests can only be used to facilitate the decision for more invasive diagnostic methods.
1
Diagnostic performance of protein-related variables was higher in effusion than in serum.
2
Effusion coronavirus antigen immunofluorescence had a positive predictive value of 1.00 but a negative predictive value of 0.57; effusion RT-PCR was positive in all five FIP cats and negative in one cat with another disease.
3
For effusion testing, Rivalta’s test showed positive and negative predictive values of 0.86 and 0.97, respectively.
4
Serum RT-PCR and immune-complex testing showed imperfect predictive performance, with positive/negative predictive values of 0.90/0.47 and 0.67/0.84, respectively.
5
Serum albumin-to-globulin ratio was more diagnostically useful than serum total protein or γ-globulin concentrations, but serum measurements could not definitively diagnose FIP.
6
Serum anti-coronavirus antibody presence alone had limited positive predictive value (0.44), whereas a titer of 1:1,600 improved predictive values to 0.94 positive and 0.88 negative.
7
Serum tests should primarily guide decisions about more invasive diagnostic procedures rather than serve as definitive tests for FIP.
8
The retrospective study evaluated diagnostic tests in 488 histopathologically confirmed FIP cats and 620 comparable controls.

Cats with suspected or histopathologically confirmed feline infectious peritonitis (FIP), including cats with body effusion

Diagnostic utility and predictive performance of serum and effusion-based tests for diagnosing FIP

Publication Details
Publication Date
2003-01-01
Journal
Publisher
ISSN
Access Type
Author Information
Authors
M. Reinacher
W. Hermanns
Katrin Hartmann
Dana Cole
Christina Binder
Johannes Hirschberger
Simone Schroo
J. W. Frost
Herman Egberink
Hans Lutz
Explore further
Open the scid.ai AI chat with a ready-made request: it will find papers on a similar topic and help build a literature review.
Find similar papers in the chat
Make a presentation
100%