Background: Although prednisone and metronidazole are commonly used to treat canine inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), no randomized-controlled trials have been performed.Hypothesis: Combination drug therapy with prednisone and metronidazole will be more effective than prednisone alone for treatment of canine IBD. Reduction in disease severity will be accompanied by decreased canine IBD activity index (CIBDAI) scores and serum C-reactive protein (CRP) concentrations.Animals: Fifty-four pet dogs diagnosed with IBD of varying severity. Methods: Dogs were randomized to receive oral prednisone (1 mg/kg; n 5 25) or prednisone and metronidazole (10 mg/kg; n 5 29) twice daily for 21 days. Clinical (CIBDAI) scores and serum CRP were determined at diagnosis and after 21 days of drug therapy. The primary efficacy measure was remission at 21 days, defined as a 75% or greater reduction in baseline CIBDAI score.Results: Differences between treatments in the rate of remission (both exceeding 80%) or the magnitude of its change over time were not observed. CRP concentrations in prednisone-treated dogs were increased because of many dogs having active disease. Both treatments reduced CRP in comparison with pretreatment concentrations. An interaction between CIBDAI and CRP was identified in 42 of 54 dogs (78%), whereas 8 of 54 dogs (15%) showed disagreement between these indices.Conclusions and Clinical Importance: Prednisone is as effective as combined treatment with prednisone and metronidazole for induction therapy of canine IBD. CRP may be normal or increased in dogs with IBD and may be useful in assessing the response of individual dogs to treatment along with changes in the CIBDAI.

No abstract

Background:The results of studies examining the role of Helicobacter spp. in the pathogenesis of canine and feline gastritis are inconclusive. Furthermore, data evaluating the effectiveness of medical therapy for eradication of Helicobacter infection are limited.Aim: To detect Helicobacter spp. in mucosal biopsies of dogs and cats diagnosed with gastritis, with fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH).Animals: Three dogs and 2 cats with signs of chronic gastrointestinal disease. Methods: Dogs and cats infected with Helicobacter spp. were treated with triple antimicrobial therapy and fed an elimination diet for 21 days. Helicobacter spp. status in endoscopic (3 dogs, 1 cat) or surgical biopsies (1 cat) of gastric mucosa was compared pre-and posttreatment in each animal by histology, FISH analysis, and polymerase chain reaction (PCR).Results: Gastritis of varying severity with intraglandular spiral bacteria was observed in all animals. Pretreatment diagnostic tests confirmed the presence of mucosal Helicobacter spp. in all animals by FISH and histopathology and in 4/5 animals by PCR. Rapid resolution of vomiting episodes was observed in all animals. Gastric biopsies performed after triple therapy revealed clearance of visible Helicobacter spp. by histopathology and negative FISH analysis, as well as PCR in all animals.Conclusions and Clinical Importance: Application of FISH to routine biopsy specimens enabled rapid and specific identification of Helicobacter spp. within the gastric mucosa of dogs and cats. Although medical therapy was useful in resolution of clinical signs and clearance of visible Helicobacter spp. in gastric biopsies, gastric inflammation persisted.

Placement of a PEG-J tube is an effective, noninvasive technique for providing enteral nutritional support of healthy dogs and cats. Bolus-feeding techniques via PEG-J tubes maintain normal nutritional status in healthy dogs and cats. This procedure for jejunostomy feeding may be easily adapted for use in clinical practice outside of an intensive care facility.

BackgroundEndoscopy is performed for direct inspection of the mucosa and acquisition of biopsies in dogs with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD).AimTo evaluate the interobserver agreement in the endoscopic assessment of duodenal mucosa in dogs with IBD.MethodsThirty‐five archived endoscopic images of grossly normal (n = 6) and inflamed (n = 29) duodenal mucosa were displayed to 3 expert and 5 trainee endoscopists. Each image was assessed independently by endoscopists for mucosal abnormalities using established indices (of hyperemia, granularity, friability, lymphatic dilatation, and erosions) or interpreted as normal mucosa (trial 1). A repeated trial (trial 2) was performed with the same images presented in random order 1 month later, and accompanied by a visual template.ResultsThere was slight interobserver agreement in initial mucosal assessment for expert and trainee endoscopists in trial 1 (kappa ≤ 0.02, P > .05). Interobserver agreement improved in trial 2 for both expert and trainee endoscopists (kappa = 0.2, P > .05) for experts and (P < .05) for trainees. There was a significant (P < .01) improvement in trainee endoscopy scores of lesions from trial 1 to trial 2. Regression analysis showed a significant (P < .01) difference between expert versus trainee endoscopy scores in trial 1. Repeat lesion assessment aided by use of a visual template (trial 2) improved the overall scores of trainee endoscopists to near that of expert endoscopists (P = .06).Conclusions and Clinical ImportanceInterobserver agreement of IBD mucosal appearance from endoscopic findings benefitted from operator experience.