| Literature DB >> 35268158 |
Marilena Bazzano1, Andrea Marchegiani1, Alessandro Troisi1, Amy McLean2, Fulvio Laus1.
Abstract
The investigation of acute phase proteins in veterinary medicine has opened the doors towards the identification and use of new markers for a timely assessment of health status in both companion and food-producing animals. The aim of this paper is to review the literature available on the use of serum amyloid A (SAA), an acute phase protein, for the diagnosis and monitoring of reproductive disorders in animals. This review critically appraises the usefulness of such marker in clinical practice and summarizes the current state of knowledge. Recent advances in the diagnosis and monitoring of reproductive diseases are presented, highlighting where SAA evaluation may enhance early diagnostic tools for dogs, cats, cattle, and equines.Entities:
Keywords: acute phase protein; bitch; cow; endometritis; mare; mastitis; serum amyloid A
Year: 2022 PMID: 35268158 PMCID: PMC8909795 DOI: 10.3390/ani12050589
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Animals (Basel) ISSN: 2076-2615 Impact factor: 2.752
Studies about serum amyloid A evaluation in pets, ruminants, and mares.
| Species | Animals/Disease/Condition | Reference |
|---|---|---|
| DOG | Healthy bitches and bitches with pyometra underwent ovariohysterectomy | Dabrowski et al., 2006 [ |
| Bitches with pyometra, with normal and complicated | Dabrowski et al., 2009 [ | |
| Healthy bitches and bitches with pyometra | Hagman et al., 2009 [ | |
| Healthy bitches and bitches suffering from systemic inflammation, | Christensen et al., 2014 [ | |
| Septic and non-septic bitches with pyometra | Jitpean et al., 2014 [ | |
| Healthy bitches and bitches with open- and closed cervix pyometra | Dabrowski et al., 2017 [ | |
| Mastitis | Kaszak et al., 2018 [ | |
| Mammary tumor | Tecles et al., 2009 [ | |
| CAT | Healthy cats and cats with pyometra | Yuki et al., 2020 [ |
| RUMINANTS | Healthy cows and cows with postpartum endometritis | Chan et al., 2009 [ |
| Healthy cows and cows with endometritis | Biswal et al., 2014 [ | |
| Healthy cows and cows with subclinical endometritis | Brodzki et al., 2015 [ | |
| Healthy cows and cows with endometritis | Kaya et al., 2016 [ | |
| Cows affected by endometritis, before and after treatment | Ahmadi et al., 2018 [ | |
| Healthy cows and cows with mastitis | Eckersall et al., 2001 [ | |
| Mastitis experimentally induced with Streptococcus uberis | Pedersen et al., 2003 [ | |
| Acute and chronic experimentally induced Staphylococcus aureus mastitis | Grönlund et al., 2003 [ | |
| Subclinical mastitis in dairy cows | Gerardi et al., 2009 [ | |
| Chronic subclinical mastitis in dairy cows | Grönlund et al., 2005 [ | |
| EQUINE | Before and after insemination | Tuppits et al., 2014 [ |
| Subclinical endometritis | Sikora et al., 2016 [ | |
| Before and after artificial insemination in uterine lavage fluid | Wojtysiak et al., 2020 [ | |
| Experimentally induced ascending placentitis | Coutinho da Silva et al., 2012 [ | |
| Healthy periparturient mares and mares with ascending placentitis | Coutinho da Silva et al., 2013 [ |
Comparison of concentration of serum amyloid A on serum samples in healthy and disease, considering the literature currently available.
| Species | Disease/Condition | Literature/References | Literature/References | Reference |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| DOG | Pyometra | 27.1 ± 13.1 μg/mL | 184.2 ± 122.3 μg/mL | Dabrowski et al., 2006 [ |
| <5 μg/mL | 61.3 ± 31 (<5–>80) μg/mL | Hagman et al., 2009 [ | ||
| 0.55 ± 0.54 μg/mL | 103.56 ± 35.2 μg/mL 1 | Dabrowski et al., 2017 [ | ||
| Mammary tumor | 1.69 (1.35–2.05) mg/L | Stage IV 75.87 (38.13–92.76) mg/L | Tecles et al., 2009 [ | |
| CAT | Pyometra | 0 µg/mL | 154.8 (0.1–182.4) μg/mL | Yuki et al., 2020 [ |
| RUMINANTS | Cattle endometritis | 48 ± 20 mg/mL 3 | 85 ± 23 mg/mL 3 | Chan et al., 2009 [ |
| 16.80 ± 1.62 μg/mL | 33.97 ± 2.14 to 35.42 ± 0.58 μg/mL | Biswal et al., 2014 [ | ||
| 30 µg/mL §,4 | 50 µg/mL §,4 | Brodzki et al., 2015 [ | ||
| 14.24 ± 0.52 µg/mL | Mild Endometritis = 20.25 ± 0.65, | Kaya et al., 2016 [ | ||
| Cattle mastitis | 5.1 (3.6–11) μg/mL | Mild mastitis = 13.8 (5.4–142) μg/mL | Eckersall et al., 2001 [ | |
| 0.47–4.62 μg/mL 5 | 10-fold increase 5 | Pedersen et al., 2003 [ | ||
| 2.82 ± 1.8 mg/L | Acute mastitis = 376.9 ± 352 mg/L | Grönlund et al., 2003 [ | ||
| 50 mg/L § | Subclinical mastitis = 104 mg/L § | Gerardi et al., 2009 [ | ||
| Sheep mastitis | 1.5 (0–29.4) μg/mL | 207 μg/mL § | Winter et al., 2003 [ | |
| EQUINE | Post-insemination | Before: 0.23 (0.05–10.16) mg/L | After: 0.30 (0.02–1.81) mg/L | Tuppits et al., 2014 [ |
| 0.001 g/L in uterine lavage fluid 4 | 0.0015 g/L in uterine lavage 4 | Wojtysiak et al., 2020 [ |
§ Average on serum samples; 1 open-cervix pyometra; 2 closed-cervix pyometra; 3 a week after parturition; 4 no range was reported within the reference paper; 5 evaluated in milk, no data available on serum concentration.