ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate a population of dogs for evidence of contrast-induced nephropathy (CIN). DESIGN: A retrospective case review between 2006 and 2012. SETTING: A university teaching hospital. ANIMALS: A total of 1,217 client-owned dogs that were administered intravenous iodinated contrast agents were reviewed for evidence of CIN. Inclusion required a measured serum creatinine within 1 week prior as well as within 1 week following administration of contrast. Eighty-six dogs with 92 contrast administrations qualified for inclusion. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: CIN was defined as an increase in >44.2 µmol/L (0.5 mg/dL) from baseline creatinine concentration within 1 week following administration of an intravenous iodinated contrast agent. A total of 7.6% of contrast administrations (7/92) fulfilled the definition of CIN. The creatinine postcontrast administration as well as the change in creatinine concentration was significantly higher in the CIN group than in the non-CIN group (median postcreatinine 150 µmol/L [1.7 mg/dL] versus 70.7 µmol/L [0.8 mg/dL], median change in creatinine 53 µmol/L [0.6 mg/dL] versus 0 µmol/L). Patient signalment, initial creatinine, number of total contrast administrations, dose of contrast received, duration of anesthesia, IV fluid administration, administration of nephrotoxic agents, and use or vasopressor therapy were not significantly different between groups. CONCLUSIONS: The temporal association between contrast administration and renal injury in these cases highlights the potential for CIN in dogs. Due to the retrospective nature of this study, a causal association between contrast administration and renal injury cannot be determined. A prospective study is needed to further evaluate CIN in dogs.
Subject(s)
Acute Kidney Injury/veterinary , Contrast Media/adverse effects , Dog Diseases/epidemiology , Iohexol/adverse effects , Acute Kidney Injury/epidemiology , Animals , Contrast Media/administration & dosage , Creatinine/blood , Dog Diseases/blood , Dog Diseases/chemically induced , Dogs , Female , Hospitals, University , Infusions, Intravenous/veterinary , Iohexol/administration & dosage , Male , Michigan/epidemiology , Retrospective Studies , Risk FactorsABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: To compare rectal versus axillary temperatures in dogs and cats. DESIGN: Prospective observational study. ANIMALS: 94 dogs and 31 cats. PROCEDURES: Paired axillary and rectal temperatures were measured in random order with a standardized method. Animal signalment, initial complaint, blood pressure, blood lactate concentration, and variables associated with vascular perfusion and coat were evaluated for associations with axillary and rectal temperatures. RESULTS: Axillary temperature was positively correlated with rectal temperature (ρ = 0.75 in both species). Median axillary temperature (38.4°C [101.1°F] in dogs, and 38.4°C [101.2°F] in cats) was significantly different from median rectal temperature in dogs (38.9°C [102.0°F]) but not in cats (38.6°C [101.5°F]). Median rectal-axillary gradient (difference) was 0.4°C (0.7°F; range, -1.3° to 2.3°C [-2.4° to 4.1°F]) in dogs and 0.17°C (0.3°F; range -1.1° to 1.6°C [-1.9° to 3°F]) in cats. Sensitivity and specificity for detection of hyperthermia with axillary temperature were 57% and 100%, respectively, in dogs and 33% and 100%, respectively, in cats; sensitivity and specificity for detection of hypothermia were 86% and 87%, respectively, in dogs and 80% and 96%, respectively, in cats. Body weight (ρ = 0.514) and body condition score (ρ = 0.431) were correlated with rectal-axillary gradient in cats. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Although axillary and rectal temperatures were correlated in dogs and cats, a large gradient was present between rectal temperature and axillary temperature, suggesting that axillary temperature should not be used as a substitute for rectal temperature.
