Original Research

The utility of uric acid assay in dogs as an indicator of functional hepatic mass

J. M. Hill, A. L. Leisewitz, A. Goddard
Journal of the South African Veterinary Association | Vol 82, No 2 | a40 | DOI: https://doi.org/10.4102/jsava.v82i2.40 | © 2011 J. M. Hill, A. L. Leisewitz, A. Goddard | This work is licensed under CC Attribution 4.0
Submitted: 10 April 2011 | Published: 11 April 2011

About the author(s)

J. M. Hill, Department of Companion Animal Clinical Studies, Faculty of Veterinary Science, University of Pretoria, Private Bag X04, Onderstepoort, 0110 South Africa., South Africa
A. L. Leisewitz, Department of Companion Animal Clinical Studies, Faculty of Veterinary Science, University of Pretoria, Private Bag X04, Onderstepoort, 0110 South Africa., South Africa
A. Goddard, Department of Companion Animal Clinical Studies, Faculty of Veterinary Science, University of Pretoria, Private Bag X04, Onderstepoort, 0110 South Africa., South Africa

Full Text:

PDF (316KB)

Share this article

Bookmark and Share

Abstract

Uric acid was used as a test for liver disease before the advent of enzymology. Three old studies criticised uric acid as a test of liver function. Uric acid, as an end-product of purine metabolism in the liver, deserved re-evaluation as a liver function test. Serumtotal bile acids are widely accepted as the most reliable liver function test. This study compared the ability of serumuric acid concentration to assess liver function with that of serumpre-prandial bile acids in dogs. In addition, due to the renal excretion of uric acid the 2 assays were also compared in a renal disease group. Using a control group of healthy dogs, a group of dogs with congenital vascular liver disease, a group of dogs with non-vascular parenchymal liver diseases and a renal disease group, the ability of uric acid and pre-prandial bile acids was compared to detect reduced functional hepatic mass overall and in the vascular or parenchymal liver disease groups separately. Sensitivities, specificities and predictive value parameters were calculated for each test. The medians of uric acid concentration did not differ significantly between any of the groups, whereas pre-prandial bile acids medians were significantly higher in the liver disease groups compared with the normal and renal disease group of dogs. The sensitivity of uric acid in detecting liver disease overall was 65% while the specificity of uric acid in detecting liver disease overall was 59 %. The sensitivity and specificity of uric acid in detecting congenital vascular liver disease was 68%and 59 %, respectively. The sensitivity and specificity of uric acid in detecting parenchymal liver disease was 63%and 60 %, respectively. The overall positive and negative predictive values for uric acid in detecting liver disease were poor and the data in this study indicated uric acid to be an unreliable test of liver function. In dogs suffering from renal compromise serum uric acid concentrations may increase into the abnormal range due to its renal route of excretion.

Keywords

No related keywords in the metadata.

Metrics

Total abstract views: 2163
Total article views: 3119


Crossref Citations

No related citations found.