Page 233 - WSAVA2018
P. 233

carriersespecially veterinary professionals or those in close contact with dogs. Dogs and their owners can harbour genetically identical strains of S. pseudintermediusincluding MRSP.
Veterinarians and owners should focus on reducing direct and indirect spread of MRSP through direct contact and contamination of environments respectively. It is reasonable to restrict MRSP infected dogs from contact with other dogs and humans, especially those who are immune-compromised, until they receive treatment and show clinical improvement. Veterinarians should also educate owners on the importance of hand hygiene and how to decontaminate the environment.
WSV18-0077
FASAVA/HILLS FELINE MEDICINE
LYMPHOMA IN CATS – COMMON CONUNDRUMS
C. Cannon1
1University of Melbourne, U-Vet Animal Hospital, Melbourne, Australia
LYMPHOMA IN CATS: COMMON CONUNDRUMS
Claire Cannon BVSc (hons) DACVIM (Oncology) MANZCVS
University of Melbourne U-Vet Animal Hospital
claire.cannon@unimelb.edu.au
Alimentary (gastrointestinal) lymphoma: The most important distinction is small cell/low grade (indolent clinical course) versus large cell/high or intermediate grade or large granular lymphoma (aggressive clinical course).
Conundrums
· Diagnosis of aggressive subtype versus small cell
GI lymphoma: Generally, diagnosis of aggressive
GI lymphoma is more straightforward than that of small cell GI lymphoma. Cytology of enlarged lymph nodes or intestinal masses is often diagnostic with surgical biopsies infrequently required. In small cell GI lymphoma, clinical presentation and results of diagnostic tests e.g. abdominal imaging, cytology and histopathology overlap with inflammatory
bowel disease. Cytology cannot reliably diagnose small cell GI lymphoma because of the difficulty in distinguishing neoplastic lymphocytes from a normal/ reactive population and because the typical diffuse mild to moderate intestinal wall thickening precludes effective sampling for cytology.
Your Singapore, the Tropical Garden City
  In dogs, MRSP carriage has been identified as a risk factor for developing surgical site infections after
tibial plateau levelling osteotomy (TPLO). Routine infection control practices are effective in controlling the potential transmission of staphylococci and MRSP between animals and to owners, veterinary and nursing staff. Personal protective equipment (PPE) prevents contamination of clothing and skin and subsequent transmission to other animals and staff.
Selected References
Bannoehr J, and Guardabassi L. Staphylococcus pseudintermediusin the dog: taxonomy, diagnostics, ecology, epidemiology and pathogenicity, Veterinary Dermatology, 2012; 23:253-e52
Morris DO, Loeffler A, Davis MF, Guardabassi L and Weese JS, Recommendations for approaches to methicillin resistant staphylococcal infections of small animals: diagnosis, therapeutic considerations and preventative measures, Veterinary Dermatology, 2017, 28:304-e69
McCarthy AJ, Harrison EM, Stanczak-Mrozek K et al. Genomic insights into the rapid emergence and evolution of MDR in Staphylococcus pseudintermedius, The Journal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy, 2015, 70(4):997-1007
Hillier A, Lloyd DH, Weese JS et al, Guidelines for the diagnosis and antimicrobial therapy of canine superficial bacterial folliculitis (antimicrobial Guidelines Working Group of the International Society for Companion Animal Infectious Diseases), Veterinary Dermatology, 2014, 25: 163-e43
· Collection of biopsies in small cell GI lymphoma: The distal small intestine is commonly involved, and thus the diagnosis may be missed if only the stomach and duodenum are biopsied. For endoscopic
biopsy collection, therefore, both upper (stomach and duodenum) and lower (colon and ileum) GI studies should be performed. The jejunum cannot be accessed in routine endoscopy procedures in small animals. Alternatively, exploratory laparotomy and full thickness biopsies of multiple GI sites can be performed. The major benefit of endoscopy is its relative non-invasiveness, but potential drawbacks compared to exploratory laparotomy include inability to assess other abdominal organs or the serosal surface of the GI tract, inability to access the jejunum and higher risk of suboptimal biopsies (e.g. due to superficial sampling or crush artefact) hampering diagnosis. Full thickness intestinal biopsies carry a risk of dehiscence and subsequent septic peritonitis, though this does not appear to be necessarily increased in the setting of alimentary lymphoma specifically (1).
· Additional tests on biopsies: No matter the method of biopsy, histopathological diagnosis of small
cell GI lymphoma can be challenging. Neoplastic lymphocytes cannot be distinguished from inflammatory infiltrate on the basis of morphology
        231
            




































































   231   232   233   234   235