A 4-year-old female spayed Boxer dog was presented to a veterinary hospital in southern Ontario for an annual health visit. The dog had been clinically well and the owner reported no concerns. On routine physical exam, palpation disclosed a large mass in the abdomen. Radiographs showed the mass to be approximately 25 9 20 cm, and located mostly in the cranial abdomen. Ultrasound of the mass confirmed radiographic size and location, and indicated that the mass appeared to be multilobulated and fluid filled. A CBC and serum biochemistry analysis revealed no abnormalities. Laparotomy was performed and revealed a large, oval, smooth mass (20 9 10 cm), which was attached to 2 other masses each about 10 9 10 cm in size. The smaller masses were also attached to the liver. The omentum had multiple variably sized cysts throughout. A fine-needle aspirate of the largest mass yielded turbid and mildly hemorrhagic fluid. Several of the omental masses were removed and fixed in formalin. Analysis of the aspirated fluid showed a total nucleated cell count of 133 9 10 9 /L and refractometric protein concentration of 72 g/L. Direct and cytocentrifuged preparations of the abdominal mass fluid were prepared (Figures 1 and 2). Figure 1. Sediment smear of an aspirate from an abdominal mass from a dog. Wright, 2009 magnification.Figure 2. Sediment smear of an aspirate from an abdominal mass from a dog showing nonstaining, variably sized, refractile material. Wright, 10009 magnification.

BackgroundEnumeration of nucleated red blood cells (NRBCs) in peripheral blood of dogs and cats is performed by manual counting during blood film evaluation. Automated methods have increased precision and accuracy; however, most analyzers cannot distinguish leukocytes and NRBCs. The Sysmex XN‐V Series may distinguish NRBCs and leukocytes; however, analytical errors occur.ObjectivesWe aimed to investigate cases with discrepant automated and manual NRBC counts, and to evaluate reasons for analytical errors.MethodsData from samples with increased NRBCs were collected retrospectively and compared with manual counts performed on blood films using Spearman's correlation, Passing‐Bablok agreement analysis, and Bland–Altman comparisons. Precision of the automated method and interobserver agreement of manual counts were evaluated. Cases with discrepant results were investigated.ResultsAgreement between the methods was good at ≤1NRBC ×109/L in dogs and cats, and inadequate at ≥1NRBC ×109/L. The automated method demonstrated a negative proportional difference to the manual method. Precision was good for the automated method (overall CV 7.1%) and interobserver agreement for the manual method was poor overall (mean CV 27.3%, range 0%‐106.1%). Inaccuracies in NRBC enumeration by the automated method occurred with high hematocrits, the mergence of the cell fragments and leukocyte clouds, and the presence of earlier erythroid precursors.ConclusionsNRBC enumeration by the WNR channel on the Sysmex XN‐1000 V is precise and has good agreement with manual counts in canine and feline blood samples at ≤1NRBC ×109/L. Manual film review is indicated for samples with ≥1NRBC ×109/L, earlier erythroid precursors, samples from greyhounds and dehydrated patients, and if gating errors are noted.

This is the first reported case of hypoglobulinemia in a dog with disseminated plasma cell neoplasia. A 6-year-old male intact Rottweiler was referred to the U-Vet Animal Hospital (Werribee, Vic, Australia) for weight loss, hyporexia, lethargy, vomiting, and soft stools. Examination of a buffy coat preparation and splenic and liver aspirates revealed a monomorphic population of plasmacytoid cells, and the same cells comprised approximately 90% of bone marrow samples submitted for cytologic and histologic evaluation. Biochemistry revealed a hypoglobulinemia, and the presence of an M-protein was not supported by serum and urine protein electrophoresis or serum immunofixation. Immunohistochemistry demonstrated strong nuclear labeling for MUM-1.

No abstract