The utility of uric acid assay in dogs as an indicator of functional hepatic mass

dc.contributor.authorHill, J.M.
dc.contributor.authorLeisewitz, Andrew L.
dc.contributor.authorGoddard, Amelia
dc.date.accessioned2011-08-23T07:53:07Z
dc.date.available2011-08-23T07:53:07Z
dc.date.issued2011-05
dc.description.abstractUric acid was used as a test for liver disease before the advent of enzymology. Three old studies criticised uric acid as a test of liver function. Uric acid, as an end-product of purine metabolism in the liver, deserved re-evaluation as a liver function test. Serumtotal bile acids are widely accepted as the most reliable liver function test. This study compared the ability of serumuric acid concentration to assess liver function with that of serumpre-prandial bile acids in dogs. In addition, due to the renal excretion of uric acid the 2 assays were also compared in a renal disease group. Using a control group of healthy dogs, a group of dogs with congenital vascular liver disease, a group of dogs with non-vascular parenchymal liver diseases and a renal disease group, the ability of uric acid and pre-prandial bile acids was compared to detect reduced functional hepatic mass overall and in the vascular or parenchymal liver disease groups separately. Sensitivities, specificities and predictive value parameters were calculated for each test. The medians of uric acid concentration did not differ significantly between any of the groups, whereas pre-prandial bile acids medians were significantly higher in the liver disease groups compared with the normal and renal disease group of dogs. The sensitivity of uric acid in detecting liver disease overall was 65% while the specificity of uric acid in detecting liver disease overall was 59 %. The sensitivity and specificity of uric acid in detecting congenital vascular liver disease was 68%and 59 %, respectively. The sensitivity and specificity of uric acid in detecting parenchymal liver disease was 63%and 60 %, respectively. The overall positive and negative predictive values for uric acid in detecting liver disease were poor and the data in this study indicated uric acid to be an unreliable test of liver function. In dogs suffering from renal compromise serum uric acid concentrations may increase into the abnormal range due to its renal route of excretion.en
dc.description.urihttp://www.journals.co.za/ej/ejour_savet.htmlen
dc.identifier.citationHill, JM, Leisewitz, AL & Goddard, A 2011, ‘The utility of uric acid assay in dogs as an indicator of functional hepatic mass’, Journal of the South African Veterinary Association, vol. 82, no. 2, pp. 86–93.en
dc.identifier.issn0038-2809
dc.identifier.other6701514975
dc.identifier.otherC-3865-2012
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/2263/17131
dc.language.isoenen
dc.publisherSouth African Veterinary Associationen
dc.rightsSouth African Veterinary Associationen
dc.subjectBile acidsen
dc.subjectDogsen
dc.subjectHepatic functionen
dc.subjectUric aciden
dc.subject.lcshClinical enzymologyen
dc.subject.lcshDogs -- Diseasesen
dc.titleThe utility of uric acid assay in dogs as an indicator of functional hepatic massen
dc.typeArticleen

Files

Original bundle

Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Name:
Hill_Utility(2011).pdf
Size:
316.58 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Description:
Article

License bundle

Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Name:
license.txt
Size:
1.71 KB
Format:
Item-specific license agreed upon to submission
Description: