Mueller Ralf S, Olivry Thierry
Medizinische Kleintierklinik, Centre for Clinical Veterinary Medicine, LMU Munich, Veterinaerstrasse 13, 80539, Munich, Germany.
Department of Clinical Sciences, College of Veterinary Medicine, North Carolina State University, 1060 William Moore Drive, Raleigh, NC, 27607, USA.
BMC Vet Res. 2017 Aug 30;13(1):275. doi: 10.1186/s12917-017-1142-0.
The gold standard to diagnose adverse food reactions (AFRs) in the dog and cat is currently an elimination diet with subsequent provocation trials. However, those trials are inconvenient and client compliance can be low. Our objective was to systematically review the literature to evaluate in vivo and in vitro tests used to diagnose AFR in small animals.
We searched three databases (CAB Abstracts, MEDLINE and Web of Science) for pertinent references on September 16, 2016. Among 71, 544 and 41 articles found in the CAB Abstract, MEDLINE and Web of Science databases, respectively, we selected 22 articles and abstracts from conference proceedings that reported data usable for evaluation of tests for AFR. Serum tests for food-specific IgE and IgG, intradermal testing with food antigens, lymphocyte proliferation tests, fecal food-specific IgE, patch, gastroscopic, and colonoscopic testing were evaluated.
Testing for serum food-specific IgE and IgG showed low repeatability and, in dogs, a highly variable accuracy. In cats, the accuracy of testing for food-specific IgE was low. Lymphocyte proliferation tests were more frequently positive and more accurate in animals with AFR, but, as they are more difficult to perform, they remain currently a research tool. All other reported tests were only evaluated by individual studies with small numbers of animals. Negative patch test reactions have a very high negative predictability in dogs and could enable a choice of ingredients for the elimination diet in selected patients. Gastroscopic and colonoscopic testing as well as food-specific fecal IgE or food-specific serum IgG measurements appear less useful. Currently, the best diagnostic procedure to identify AFRs in small animals remains an elimination diet with subsequent provocation trials.
目前诊断犬猫食物不良反应(AFR)的金标准是排除饮食法及随后的激发试验。然而,这些试验不方便,客户依从性可能较低。我们的目的是系统回顾文献,以评估用于诊断小动物AFR的体内和体外试验。
2016年9月16日,我们在三个数据库(CAB文摘数据库、MEDLINE数据库和科学网)中搜索相关参考文献。在CAB文摘数据库、MEDLINE数据库和科学网数据库中分别找到的71篇、544篇和41篇文章中,我们从会议论文集中选择了22篇文章和摘要,这些文章报告了可用于评估AFR检测的数据。对食物特异性IgE和IgG的血清检测、食物抗原皮内试验、淋巴细胞增殖试验、粪便食物特异性IgE、斑贴试验、胃镜检查和结肠镜检查进行了评估。
食物特异性IgE和IgG的血清检测重复性低,在犬中准确性高度可变。在猫中,食物特异性IgE检测的准确性较低。淋巴细胞增殖试验在患有AFR的动物中更常呈阳性且更准确,但由于操作更困难,目前它仍然是一种研究工具。所有其他报告的检测仅通过少量动物的个体研究进行评估。斑贴试验阴性反应在犬中具有非常高的阴性预测价值,可为选定患者的排除饮食选择成分。胃镜和结肠镜检查以及食物特异性粪便IgE或食物特异性血清IgG测量似乎用处较小。目前,识别小动物AFR的最佳诊断方法仍然是排除饮食法及随后的激发试验。