| Literature DB >> 27658509 |
Simona Destefanis1, Daniela Giretto2, Maria Cristina Muscolo3, Alessandro Di Cerbo4, Gianandrea Guidetti5, Sergio Canello5, Angela Giovazzino6, Sara Centenaro7, Giuseppe Terrazzano6,8.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Canine keratoconjunctivitis sicca (cKCS) is an inflammatory eye condition related to a deficiency in the tear aqueous fraction. Etiopathogenesis of such disease is substantially multifactorial, combining the individual genetic background with environmental factors that contribute to the process of immunological tolerance disruption and, as a consequence, to the emergence of autoimmunity disease. In this occurrence, it is of relevance the role of the physiological immune-dysregulation that results in immune-mediated processes at the basis of cKCS. Current therapies for this ocular disease rely on immunosuppressive treatments. Clinical response to treatment frequently varies from poor to good, depending on the clinical-pathological status of eyes at diagnosis and on individual response to therapy. In the light of the variability of clinical response to therapies, we evaluated the use of an anti-inflammatory/antioxidant nutraceutical diet with potential immune-modulating activity as a therapeutical adjuvant in cKCS pharmacological treatment. Such combination was administered to a cohort of dogs affected by cKCS in which the only immunosuppressive treatment resulted poorly responsive or ineffective in controlling the ocular symptoms.Entities:
Keywords: Antioxidant and anti-inflammatory diet; Immune-mediated ocular disease; Keratoconjunctivitis sicca; Nutraceutical diet
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2016 PMID: 27658509 PMCID: PMC5034585 DOI: 10.1186/s12917-016-0841-2
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Vet Res ISSN: 1746-6148 Impact factor: 2.741
Background data of enrolled dogs
| Group | Mean age (years ± SEM) | Mean weight (Kg ± SEM) | STT value (mm ± SEM) | Corneal pigment density score (0-3 ± SEM) | Conjunctival inflammation score (0-3 ± SEM) | Mucus discharge score (0-3 ± SEM) | Corneal keratinization score (0-2 ± SEM) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Control | 6.03 ± 0.15 | 13.04 ± 1.12 | 4.3 ± 0.5 | 1.0 ± 0.1 | 2.1 ± 0.1 | 1.7 ± 0.1 | 1.5 ± 0.1 |
| Treatment | 6.1 ± 0.17 | 12.01 ± 1.17 | 4.7 ± 0.4 | 0.9 ± 0.1 | 2.1 ± 0.1 | 1.8 ± 0.1 | 1.5 ± 0.1 |
Daily table recommendation for diet
| Weight (Kg) | Diet amount per day (g) |
|---|---|
| 1 – 10 | 30 – 180 |
| 11 – 20 | 190 – 300 |
| 21 – 35 | 310 – 455 |
| 36 – 50 | 465 – 595 |
Average substances administer to dog depending on body weight (considering medium body weight)
| Nutraceutical substances | Amount per kg of complete food | Dog weight 10 kg | 11 kg | 12 kg | 13 kg | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ascophyllum nodosum | 40000 | mg/kg | 7200 | 7600 | 8200 | 8600 |
| Cucumis melo | 300 | mg/kg | 54 | 57 | 61,5 | 64,5 |
| Carica papaya | 135 | mg/kg | 24,3 | 25,65 | 27,675 | 29,025 |
| Aloe vera | 135 | mg/kg | 24,3 | 25,65 | 27,675 | 29,025 |
| Haematococcus pluvialis (astaxanthin) | 49 | mg/kg | 8,82 | 9,31 | 10,045 | 10,535 |
| Resveratrol (Poligonum Cuspidatum) | 7 | mg/kg | 1,26 | 1,33 | 1,435 | 1,505 |
| Zinc sulphate monohydrate | 137 | mg/kg | 24,66 | 26,03 | 28,085 | 29,455 |
| Curcuma longa | 102 | mg/kg | 18,36 | 19,38 | 20,91 | 21,93 |
| Camellia sinensis | 70 | mg/kg | 12,6 | 13,3 | 14,35 | 15,05 |
| Punica granatum | 70 | mg/kg | 12,6 | 13,3 | 14,35 | 15,05 |
| Piper nigrum | 30 | mg/kg | 5,4 | 5,7 | 6,15 | 6,45 |
Fig. 1Eyes improvement after 60-days treatment with 0,03 % Tacrolimus collyrium BID and 0,2 % Hyalistil eyewash plus the nutraceutical diet in ND group and with with 0,03 % Tacrolimus collyrium BID and 0,2 % Hyalistil eyewash plus the standard diet in SD group. a–c eye before treatment plus nutraceutical diet (time = 0), b–d eye at the end of treatment plus nutraceutical diet (time = 60). e–g eye before treatment plus standard diet (time = 0), f–h eye at the end of treatment plus standard diet (time = 60)
Fig. 2a-b Mean conjunctival inflammation scores before and after 60 days treatment for ND and SD group, a significant decrease (****P < 0.0001) was observed in ND group at the end of the treatment; c–d mean corneal keratinization scores before and after 60 days treatment for ND and SD group, a significant decrease (****P < 0.0001) was observed in ND group at the end of the treatment; e–f mean corneal pigment density scores before and after 60 days treatment for ND and SD group, a significant decrease (****P < 0.0001) was observed in ND group at the end of the treatment; g–h mean mucus discharge scores before and after 60 days treatment for ND and SD group, a significant decrease (****P < 0.0001) was observed in ND group at the end of the treatment; i–l mean tear production (STT) in mm/min before and after 60 days treatment for ND and SD group, STT values resulted significantly increased (****P < 0.0001) in ND group at the end of treatment
Fig. 3Graphical schematization of clinical symptoms score trends after 30 days since treatment suspension and after 30 days since treatment resumption. a Mean conjunctival inflammation scores before (T 60) and after 30 days nutraceutical diet suspension (T 90) for ND group and (b) after 30 days since nutraceutical diet resumption (T 120); c mean corneal keratinization scores before (T 60) and after 30 days nutraceutical diet suspension (T 90) for ND group and (d) after 30 days since nutraceutical diet resumption (T 120); e mean corneal pigment density scores before (T 60) and after 30 days nutraceutical diet suspension (T 90) for ND group and (f) after 30 days since nutraceutical diet resumption (T 120), scores resulted significantly increased (*P < 0.05); g mean mucus discharge scores before (T 60) and after 30 days nutraceutical diet suspension (T 90) for ND group and (h) after 30 days since nutraceutical diet resumption (T 120), scores resulted significantly increased (**P < 0.01); i mean tear production (STT) in mm/min before (T 60) and after 30 days nutraceutical diet suspension (T 90) for ND group and (l) after 30 days since nutraceutical diet resumption (T 120)