Canine Atopic Dermatitis (AD) is a common complex and multifactorial disease involving immune dysregulation, genetic predisposition, skin barrier defects, environmental factors and allergic sensitization. To date, diagnosis of canine AD relies on a combination of patient history, clinical examination, allergy testing and response to diet trials/therapies with no reliable biomarkers available to distinguish AD from other diseases with similar clinical presentations. A handful of studies to identify potential biomarkers in the peripheral blood of AD dogs and healthy controls have been performed with some showing inconsistent and contradictory results. In this study, we, for the first time, report statistically significant increases in expression of phosphodiesterase 4D (PDE4D) gene in peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs) and miR-203 in plasma from AD dogs compared to healthy controls. In addition, we report a statistically non-significant change of the CD4 + /CD8 + ratio, a dramatic decrease of three gene markers (PIAS1, RORA and SH2B1) as well as a panel of differential expression of cytokines in AD dogs in comparison to the healthy controls. Our study provides important insight into the complexities of canine AD, and further studies to verify the specificity of these findings for canine AD at a larger-scale are warranted.

No abstract

ObjectiveTo describe the prescribing habits of a sample of small animal veterinarians pertaining to use of fluoxetine in dogs and cats.DesignExploratory descriptive survey using a questionnaire, available on paper and through email, distributed to small animal veterinarians by convenience sampling.ParticipantsVeterinarians practicing small animal medicine in North America contacted by email and at local veterinary meetings.ResultsOf 127 initial respondents, 106 prescribed fluoxetine for dogs and/or cats. The majority (91 per cent) indicated the drug be given once every 24 hours. Respondents used one or more formulations of fluoxetine. Of those who prescribed fluoxetine for both dogs and cats (57 per cent), 80 per cent used a generic form. A third prescribed fluoxetine only for dogs (31 per cent) and 72 per cent of these prescribed the US Food and Drug Administration approved product that was available at that time. The primary use of fluoxetine was related to behaviour problems. Overall for dogs, uses of fluoxetine were organised into five major categories by the investigators: Anxieties, Aggression, Compulsive Disorders, Phobias/Fear and Other, Anxieties being the most common. Of those who prescribed fluoxetine, 12 per cent did so only for cats and the majority of these prescribed generic (58 per cent) and or compounded (42 per cent) forms. Overall for cats, uses of fluoxetine were organised into six major categories: Elimination behaviours, Anxieties, Aggression, Dermatologic/Grooming, Compulsive Disorders and Other, Elimination behaviours being most common.ConclusionsThis study indicates that practitioners prescribed fluoxetine in generic, proprietary and compounded formulations for a variety of behaviour problems of dogs and cats. The broad use by the respondents suggests how important psychotropic drugs are in veterinary medicine. Research, information and continuing education regarding such drugs and animal behaviour should be made available to the general practitioner.

Objective:The aim of the present study was to compare the gingival trauma with Prophy-Jet and rubber-cup polishing techniques using aluminium trihydroxide as polishing agent.Materials and Methods:15 subjects suffering from gingivitis were enrolled in a randomized controlled split mouth experimental investigation. After scaling, Prophy-Jet and rubber-cup polishing techniques were applied on either side of the mouth using aluminium trihydroxide as polishing agent and the gingival trauma was assessed immediately after, 7 days and 21 days posttreatment using trauma index (TI).Results:Statistically significant difference was observed in the mean TI scores of gingiva immediately after polishing with the two techniques, with the mean score of 0.25 ± 0.12 after rubber-cup and 0.40 ± 0.11 after prophy- jet polishing technique.Conclusion:Within the limitations of the study, it can be concluded that inspite of higher gingival trauma immediately after air polishing using aluminium trihydroxide agent, there was no lasting difference in gingival trauma between rubber-cup and air-polishing techniques at 7 and 21 days posttreatment.

Background. The second wave of Novel Coronavirus disease (COVID-19, SARS-CoV-2) is proving more disastrous than the first because of the new mutant stains. Under these circumstances, vaccination is the only effective solution that can save millions of lives across the globe. Objectives. The present study was conducted to assess the attitude and acceptance/willingness of health care professionals (medical and dental) towards COVID-19 vaccine. Materials and Methods. An online questionnaire survey was conducted among medical and dental professionals working in different hospitals of two states of India. A total of 520 subjects constituted the final sample size. A self-constructed questionnaire (divided into 2 parts) containing 12 questions was administered to obtain information from the subjects regarding their attitude and willingness towards COVID 19 vaccine. Statistical analysis was done using chi-square test and multiple liner regression analysis. Odds ratio with 95% CI were also generated. Statistical significance was set at p≤0.05. Results. Majority of the subjects (67% of dental and 73% of medical) had full confidence on the effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccine. Willingness to get vaccinated was shown by 63% of subjects and 65% had positive attitude towards vaccine. Some subjects (45.5% dental and 48.4% medical) showed concern regarding unforeseen effects of the vaccine. Willingness to get vaccinated was 3.45 higher in subjects who were involved in COVID duties. Subjects giving less preference to natural immunity over vaccine showed more willingness (OR: 2.98) towards getting the vaccine. Conclusion. The findings of the study showed that acceptance and attitude of subjects regarding COVID 19 vaccine was suboptimal as there were various factors which contributed towards subjects’ hesitancy to get vaccinated. There is an utmost need to address various issues regarding vaccine safety to promote high uptake.