16 research outputs found

    Test characteristics of milk amyloid A ELISA, somatic cell count, and bacteriological culture for detection of intramammary pathogens that cause subclinical mastitis

    Get PDF
    Bovine mastitis is an important disease in the dairy industry, causing economic losses as a result of withheld milk and treatment costs. Several studies have suggested milk amyloid A (MAA) as a promising biomarker in the diagnosis of mastitis. In the absence of a gold standard for diagnosis of subclinical mastitis, we estimated the diagnostic test accuracy of a commercial MAA-ELISA, somatic cell count (SCC), and bacteriological culture using Bayesian latent class modeling. We divided intramammary infections into 2 classes: those caused by major pathogens (e.g., Escherichia coli, Staphylococcus aureus, streptococci, and lacto-/enterococci) and those caused by all pathogens (major pathogens plus Corynebacterium bovis, coagulase-negative staphylococci, Bacillus spp., Streptomyces spp.). We applied the 3 diagnostic tests to all samples. Of 433 composite milk samples included in this study, 275 (63.5%) contained at least 1 colony of any bacterial species; of those, 56 contained major pathogens and 219 contained minor pathogens. The remaining 158 samples (36.5%) were sterile. We determined 2 different thresholds for the MAA-ELISA using Bayesian latent class modeling: 3.9 µg/mL to detect mastitis caused by major pathogens and 1.6 µg/mL to detect mastitis caused by all pathogens. The optimal SCC threshold for identification of subclinical mastitis was 150,000 cells/mL; this threshold led to higher specificity (Sp) than 100,000 cells/mL. Test accuracy for major-pathogen intramammary infections was as follows: SCC, sensitivity (Se) 92.6% and Sp 72.9%; MMA-ELISA, Se 81.4% and Sp 93.4%; bacteriological culture, Se 23.8% and Sp 95.2%. Test accuracy for all-pathogen intramammary infections was as follows: SCC, sensitivity 90.3% and Sp 71.8%; MAA-ELISA, Se 88.0% and Sp 65.2%; bacteriological culture, Se 83.8% and Sp 54.8%. We suggest the use of SCC and MAA-ELISA as a combined screening procedure for situations such as a Staphylococcus aureus control program. With Bayesian latent class analysis, we were able to identify a more differentiated use of the 3 diagnostic tools. The MAA-ELISA is a valuable addition to existing tools for the diagnosis of subclinical mastitis

    Comparative Survival after Trans-apical, Direct Aortic, and Subclavian Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation (Data from the UK TAVI Registry)

    No full text
    Many patients have iliofemoral vessel anatomy unsuitable for conventional transfemoral (TF) transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). Safe and practical alternatives to the TF approach are, therefore, needed. This study compared outcomes of alternative nonfemoral routes, transapical (TA), direct aortic (DA), and subclavian (SC), with standard femoral access. In this retrospective study, data from 3,962 patients in the UK TAVI registry were analyzed. All patients who received TAVI through a femoral, subclavian, TA, or DA approach were eligible for inclusion. The primary outcome measure was survival up to 2 years. Median Logistic EuroSCORE was similar for SC, DA, and TA but significantly lower in the TF cohort (22.1% vs 20.3% vs 21.2% vs 17.0%, respectively, p <0.0001). Estimated 1-year survival rate was similar for TF (84.6 – 0.7%) and SC (80.5 – 3%, p [ 0.27) but significantly worse for TA (74.7 – 1.6%, p <0.001) and DA (75.2 – 3.3%, p <0.001). A Cox proportional hazard model was used to analyze survival up to 2 years. Survival in the SC group was not significantly different from the TF group (hazard ratio [HR] 1.22, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.88 to 1.70, p [ 0.24). In contrast, survival in the TA (HR 1.74, 95% CI 1.43 to 2.11; p <0.001) and DA (HR 1.55, 95% CI 1.13 to 2.14; p <0.01) cohorts was significantly reduced compared with TF. In conclusion, TA and DA TAVI were associated with similar survival, both significantly worse than with the TF route. In contrast, subclavian access was not significantly different from TF and may represent the safest nonfemoral access route for TAVI
    corecore