Abstract

Uric 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. Serum totalbile acids are widely accepted as the most reliable liver function test. This study compared the ability of serum uric acid concentration to assess liver function with that of serum pre-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.

Highlights

  • Uric acid is an attractive candidate for a liver function test

  • The purpose of this study was to compare the utility of serum uric acid (UA) concentrations compared with the concentration of serum pre-prandial or baseline bile acids (b-BA) as a screening test to assess liver function in dogs with liver disease, and to assess UA in dogs with renal disease and a control group of healthy dogs

  • When the sensitivity and specificity of UA to detect liver disease overall (Groups 2 and 3 combined) were calculated, the lack of any significant difference between the UA medians across the groups resulted in a poor sensitivity of 65 % and even poorer specificity of just 59 %, while b-BA have been shown in various studies to have better sensitivity and specificity in screening for reduced hepatic function

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Uric acid is an attractive candidate for a liver function test. In dogs in particular, the UA is decarboxylated producing allantoin, which is watersoluble and can be excreted by the kidneys[10,14,24,30]. In these species serum UA levels only increase to the levels encountered in humans when there is hepatic dysfunction[4,7,10,14,24,30]. UA fell out of favour as a liver function test following aDepartment of Companion Animal Clinical Studies, Faculty of Veterinary Science, University of Pretoria, Private Bag X04, Onderstepoort, 0110 South Africa

Objectives
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call