Background: Serum lipase activities measured by catalytic assays are claimed to be of limited utility for diagnosing pancreatitis in cats. The Spec fPL assay currently is believed the most sensitive test; however, studies comparing different lipase assays are lacking. 1,2-o-dilauryl-rac-glycero-3-glutaric acid-(6′-methylresorufin) ester (DGGR) assay for the determination of lipase activity has been evaluated in dogs, but no information is available in cats.Objectives: To investigate the agreement of DGGR-lipase activity and Spec fPL concentration in cats with clinical signs consistent with pancreatitis.Animals: Two hundred fifty-one client-owned cats.Methods: DGGR-lipase activity and Spec fPL concentration measured from the same blood sample in cats undergoing investigation for pancreatitis. The agreement between DGGR-lipase and Spec fPL at different cutoffs was assessed using Cohen's kappa coefficient (j). Sensitivity and specificity were calculated for 31 cases where pancreatic histopathology was available.Results: DGGR-lipase (cutoff, 26 U/L) and Spec fPL (cutoff, >5.3 lg/L) had a j of 0.68 (standard error [SE] 0.046). DGGR-lipase (cutoff, 26 U/L) and Spec fPL (cutoff, >3.5 lg/L) had a j of 0.60 (SE, 0.05). The maximum j at a Spec fPL cutoff >5.3 lg/L was found when the DGGR-lipase cutoff was set >34 U/L and calculated as 0.755 (SE, 0.042). Sensitivity and specificity were 48% and 63% for DGGR-lipase (cut-off, 26 U/L) and 57% and 63% for Spec fPL (>5.3 lg/L), respectively.Conclusions and Clinical Importance: Both lipase assays agreed substantially. DGGR assay seems a useful and cost-efficient method compared to the Spec fPL test.

Agreement between pancreatic ultrasonography and lipase assay results was only fair. It remains unknown whether lipase results or pancreatic ultrasonography constitutes the more accurate test for diagnosing pancreatitis; therefore, results of both tests need to be interpreted with caution.

BackgroundFeline pancreas‐specific lipase (Spec fPL) is considered a useful test for the antemortem diagnosis of pancreatitis in cats. A recent study found good agreement between the results of the Spec fPL and catalytic 1,2‐o‐dilauryl‐rac‐glycero‐3‐glutaric acid‐(6′‐methylresorufin) ester (DGGR) lipase assay. Prospective studies evaluating their sensitivity and specificity are lacking.ObjectivesTo compare the results of the Spec fPL and the DGGR assays with a standardized histologic assessment of the pancreas.AnimalsSixty client‐owned cats presented for necropsy.MethodsProspective study: Spec fPL concentrations and serum DGGR lipase activity were measured from the same blood sample. The pancreas was removed within 3 hours after euthanasia; serial transverse sections were made every 0.5 cm throughout the entire pancreas and reviewed using a histologic grading scheme. Sensitivity and specificity for the Spec fPL and DGGR assay results were determined.ResultsThe sensitivity and specificity for the Spec fPL assay (cutoff value ≥5.4 μg/L) was 42.1 [95% confidence interval (95% CI), 29.4–55.9%] and 100% (95% CI, 31.0–100.0%). The sensitivity and specificity for the DGGR assay (cutoff value >26 U/L) was 36.8 (95% CI, 24.7–50.7%) and 100% (95% CI, 31.0–100.0%). When lymphocytic inflammation up to 10% of a section was considered normal, the sensitivity and specificity for Spec fPL assay (cutoff value ≥5.4 μg/L) was 61.1 (95% CI, 36.1–81.7%) and 69.0% (95% CI, 52.8–81.9%) and the sensitivity and specificity for the DGGR assay (cutoff value >26 U/L) was 66.7 (95% CI, 41.2–85.6%) and 78.6% (95% CI, 62.8–89.2%).Conclusions and Clinical ImportanceBoth lipase assays performed similarly well, but their agreement with histologic pancreatic inflammation was limited.

With interest we read the "ACVIM consensus statement on pancreatitis in cats." It was our impression that information regarding comparisons of Spec feline pancreas-specific lipase (fPL) and 1,2-o-dilaurylrac-glycero-3-glutaric acid-(6'-methylresorufin) ester (DGGR)-lipase (LIPC Roche, Roche Diagnostics Corp., Indianapolis, IN), as well as their performances compared to pancreatic ultrasound was incomplete. A consensus statement should aim to be comprehensive in summarizing the existing literature. If information about Spec fPL at the level of an abstract 1 is deemed sufficient evidence, then also abstracts from other authors on the topic should have been included.The authors state that clinical signs of pancreatitis in cats are nonspecific and that results of CBC, biochemistry, and urinalysis are "not

No abstract