Background-Naturally occurring alloantibodies produced against A and B red cell antigens in cats can cause acute hemolytic transfusion reactions. Blood incompatibilities, unrelated to the AB blood group system, have also been suspected after blood transfusions through routine crossmatch testing or as a result of hemolytic transfusion reactions.

BackgroundAlthough there is serologic evidence of exposure of cats to Leptospira spp., clinical disease is rarely reported in cats.ObjectiveTo compare the seropositivity and urinary polymerase chain reaction (PCR) status for Leptospira spp. between healthy (H) cats and cats with kidney disease (KD), to investigate the serovars potentially involved, and to evaluate potential risk factors.AnimalsTwo hundred and forty client‐owned cats.MethodsCats were prospectively recruited and classified based on physical examination, complete blood count, serum biochemistry profile, and urinalysis (125 H and 115 KD cats). Leptospira spp. serology (titers ≥1 : 100 considered positive) and urinary PCR were performed in all cats. Data assessing risk factors, obtained from a questionnaire, were evaluated using logistic regression models.ResultsSeropositivity for Leptospira spp. was statistically different between groups: 7.2% (9/125) and 14.9% (17/114) in the H and KD, respectively (P = .05). The proportion of PCR‐positive cats was not. The most common serovars detected serologically were Pomona (n = 16) and Bratislava (n = 8). Risk factors for seropositivity included outdoor and hunting lifestyles (P = .03 and P < .001, respectively), the presence of another cat in the household (P < .01), and the sampling period, with the greatest number of cases identified between June and August (P =.02).ConclusionsSeropositivity was significantly greater in KD cats, suggesting that the role of Leptospira spp. in KD in cats should be further investigated. The detection of urinary shedding of leptospires in several cats identifies a potential role in the transmission of the organism.

An update on the 2005 American College of Veterinary Internal Medicine (ACVIM) Consensus Statement on blood donor infectious disease screening was presented at the 2015 ACVIM Forum in Indianapolis, Indiana, followed by panel and audience discussion. The updated consensus statement is presented below. The consensus statement aims to provide guidance on appropriate blood‐borne pathogen testing for canine and feline blood donors in North America.

Based upon the identification of an acquired alloantibody in a Dalmatian, a presumably new common blood type named Dal was identified. Dalmatians lacking the Dal antigen are likely at risk of delayed and acute hemolytic transfusion reactions.

Based on previous research, cats were thought to have been resistant to the development of clinical signs following infection with Leptospira spp. This case report presents three confirmed, naturally infected clinical cases of feline leptospirosis. The cases presented were all indoor/outdoor cats that were known to hunt. They were also all presented at different stages of renal insufficiency; however, they did not show any liver involvement. The authors suggest that there may be a longer incubation period in cats than dogs and recommend further research in the form of a large, clinical study.

Background: Based upon alloantibodies produced after sensitizing dogs with transfused blood, more than a dozen blood group systems have been recognized thus far, and some have been classified as dog erythrocyte antigens (DEA).Hypothesis: A new canine red cell antigen was suspected, based on the development of specific alloantibodies in a Dalmatian previously sensitized by blood transfusions.Animals: Twenty-six Dalmatians (including 1 Dalmatian in need of blood compatibility studies); 55 canine blood donors. Methods: Serologic tests, including blood typing, crossmatching, and direct Coombs' test were performed by standard tube techniques and a novel gel column technology adapted from human blood banking.Results: By day 40 after transfusion of an anemic Dalmatian, all major crossmatch tests to 55 non-Dalmatian dogs were incompatible. The 2 initial donors, who were compatible before transfusion, were also now incompatible, suggesting the development of an alloantibody to a common red cell antigen. No siblings were available, but 4 of 25 unrelated Dalmatians were crossmatch compatible, suggesting that they were missing the same red cell antigen. The patient was blood typed DEA 1.1, 3, 4, and 5 positive, but DEA 7 negative. Further blood typing and crossmatching results did not support an association to any of these known blood types. The alloantibodies produced were determined to be of the immunoglobulin G class.Conclusions and Clinical Importance: Based upon the identification of an acquired alloantibody in a Dalmatian, a presumably new common blood type named Dal was identified. Dalmatians lacking the Dal antigen are likely at risk of delayed and acute hemolytic transfusion reactions.

Objectives:Thrombosis is a well-recognized phenomenon in dogs and cats with a significant impact on morbidity and mortality. Despite growing awareness of thrombosis and increased use of antithrombotic therapy, there is little information in the veterinary literature to guide the use of anticoagulant and antiplatelet medications. The goal of Domain 1 was to explore the association between disease and thrombosis in a number of conditions identified as potential risk factors in the current veterinary literature, to provide the basis for prescribing recommendations.Design: A population exposure comparison outcome format was used to represent patient, exposure, comparison, and outcome. Population Exposure Comparison Outcome questions were distributed to worksheet authors who performed comprehensive searches, summarized the evidence, and created guideline recommendations that were reviewed by domain chairs. Revised guidelines then underwent the Delphi survey process to reach consensus on the final guidelines.Diseases evaluated included immune-mediated hemolytic anemia, protein-losing nephropathy, pancreatitis, glucocorticoid therapy, hyperadrenocorticism, neoplasia, sepsis, cerebrovascular disease, and cardiac disease.Settings: Academic and referral veterinary medical centers.

Objectives: To systematically review available evidence and establish guidelines related to the risk of developing thrombosis and the management of small animals with antithrombotics. Design: Standardized, systematic evaluation of the literature (identified by searching Medline via PubMed and CAB abstracts) was carried out in 5 domains (Defining populations at risk; Defining rational therapeutic use; Defining evidence-based protocols; Refining and monitoring antithrombotic therapies; and Discontinuing antithrombotic therapies). Evidence evaluation was carried out using Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcome generated within each domain questions to address specific aims. This was followed by categorization of relevant articles according to level of evidence and quality (Good, Fair, or Poor). Synthesis of these data led to the development of a series of statements. Consensus on the final guidelines was achieved via Delphi-style surveys.Draft recommendations were presented at 2 international veterinary conferences and made available for community assessment, review, and comment prior to final revisions and publication. Settings: Academic and referral veterinary medical centers.Results: Over 500 studies were reviewed in detail. Worksheets from all 5 domains generated 59 statements with 83 guideline recommendations that were refined during 3 rounds of Delphi surveys. A high degree of consensus was reached across all guideline recommendations. Conclusions:Overall, systematic evidence evaluations yielded more than 80 recommendations for the treatment of small animals with or at risk of developing thrombosis. Numerous significant knowledge gaps were highlighted by the evidence reviews undertaken, indicating the need for substantial additional research in this field. K E Y W O R D S ) for their dedicated contributions to this effort. We would also like to thank the members of the veterinary community who attended and contributed to the discussion of the guidelines during the 2018 EVECC Congress and IVECCS sessions and subsequently during the online open-comment stages. CONFLICT OF INTERESTThe authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.