metacam

Re: metacam

Fiona Leathers — Mon, 11 May 2009 10:49:23 GMT

It explains it in the first couple of post veterinary - blood, something starting with T, analytes

Sorry I forgot the middle word by the time I posted!! My head hurts!!

Re: metacam

Laura x — Thu, 07 May 2009 21:41:37 GMT

[quote user="heather mac"]

[quote user="STRVN"]

Excuse my ignorance but what is a V-BTA test?

[/quote]

I was wondering the same thing Sandra.

[/quote]

Me too!!

Re: metacam

Lyn — Thu, 30 Apr 2009 08:15:15 GMT

Thank you very much for that - I did breath a sigh of relief though, after the second test.

Will look at the link you gave, but your explanation was good, and pretty well put in writing what the my vet said too. Thank you again.

Re: metacam

Emma Jarratt — Thu, 30 Apr 2009 08:03:32 GMT

[quote user="Lyn"]thus the V-BTA test. which came back positive, and (as you say) with sensitivity of 94.4% if no haematuria present !! A week later, there was much less blood in the urine, so we thought it made sense to send off for the antigen test again and that was when it came back negative. Certainly false positives are more likely when there is so much blood about. Had it come back positive with no visible blood then there would be no doubt of TCC.[/quote]

Just to clarify about sensitivity and specificity - sensitivity refers to the % of correctly identified positives, specificity to the % of correctly identified negatives. So this test has a sensitivity of 94%, which means out of 100 dogs with TCC, it will identify 94 of them, and give 6 false negatives. The specificity of 78% means that out of 100 dogs who do not have TCC, it will correctly identify 78 of them, but give 22 false positives - regardless of haematuria which may well complicate matters further depending on how the test works (would be a major flaw of a urine test though!). The upshot being that a positive result even without haematuria would have a pretty significant chance of being a false positive.

If a test will likely correctly identify the true positives, it is useful for ruling out disease, as a negative result is likely to be true negative (there is a low rate of false negatives). But if a test is less accurate at identifying true negatives, a positive result may not be a true positive (there is a high rate of false positives) so difficult to make a positive diagnosis based on the test alone.

That probably makes people go cross-eyed at this time in the morning - have a look at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Specificity_(test) if they explain it any better!

Re: metacam

Lyn — Thu, 30 Apr 2009 07:45:46 GMT

Yes, I absolutely agree with your points. It is not clear cut enough to fill in the yellow form to be honest - I just wondered if anyone else had come across it . Seemingly not.

Initially, she was very off colour and the haematuria was evident. She very often suffers with uti's. So a sample was sent off for culture to more easily use the correct a/b's. However, there was no significant bacterial growth, so the immediate assumption was TCC - thus the V-BTA test. which came back positive, and (as you say) with sensitivity of 94.4% if no haematuria present !! A week later, there was much less blood in the urine, so we thought it made sense to send off for the antigen test again and that was when it came back negative. Certainly false positives are more likely when there is so much blood about. Had it come back positive with no visible blood then there would be no doubt of TCC. As it is, I am left wondering what is going on as nothing seemed to add up. I did know (the very clued up vet who suggested the BTA test explained usual treatment) that NSAID's are used for TCC so it seemed fortuitous at the time.

She went downhill, would not eat normally, and appeared to be very uncomfortble swallowing, when even water was syringed into her mouth. I could only give her the metacam safely, AFTER she had eaten (rather than in the food as it put her off eating if she smelt it) as I was concerned about stomach ulceration.

Brainstorming one night made me suspect that the metacam (long term usage for arthritis) might be the culprit if it was causing acid reflux for instance, so I bought and used some colloidal silver, some yoghurt and some 20+ manuka honey.... and I stopped the metacam. 3 days later, II have a muche happier dog who is [quote user="ej1574"]

I think more diagnostics would be needed to draw any firm conclusions. However if you do suspect an adverse reaction to a drug then reporting it to the manufacturer and VMD using the yellow forms would be a good idea.

Meloxicam is actually used as a treatment for TCC. It seems odd/worrying that a test for bladder tumour analytes would be positive one week and then negative the next - points to the test having low specificity. Actually if you scroll down that page under 'expected results' it states a sensitivity of 95% but a specificity of only 78%. This would give a pretty significant rate of false positives - more useful for ruling out disease if it's negative, than actually making a diagnosis based on a positive result.

[/quote] more comfortable eating and ready for meals.

The only thing which still concerns me is the real reason for the blood in the urine (which has now ceased) - but I do feel there must be a connection.

sorry for loooong post.

Re: metacam

Emma Jarratt — Thu, 30 Apr 2009 07:08:22 GMT

Re: metacam

Lyn — Thu, 30 Apr 2009 05:36:27 GMT

Thank you Sarah, I was asking if anyone had experienced blood in urine as a side effect of metacam. I did know that it could cause kidney issues long term, but this was VERY odd.

The metacam has been stopped and the blood has stopped (hope I am not tempting providence) too.

The test is not that unheard of, it checks for antigens and if neoplasia is present. It is, of course, a much easier first check than a scan, which was why it was done. [quote user="sarah parrott"]

hi i may just be saying something that everyone knows but i had a rat on metacam for a very long time due to an ankle swelling she got in old age (the metacam was for dogs) but in the end she had kidney problems because of it, and i was told this was a side effect of metacam, maybe this was the same for the bitch?

[/quote]

Sorry to have caused a side shoot discussion, I was only trying to explain why I was so concerned about the blood and had suspected that metacam could be at the root of the problem. It does seem odd that there was so much blood, it may be a coincidence of course, but smehow I think there must be a link.

Thank you all anyway.

Re: metacam

Fleabee99 — Wed, 29 Apr 2009 22:20:02 GMT

Re: metacam

Anonymous — Wed, 29 Apr 2009 22:01:21 GMT

yes it's a urine test to test the levels of blood in the urine i guess? <confused>

or if they have cancer?? I donno... I did my first PCV test today though!

Re: metacam

Sandra Taylor RVN, MBVNA — Wed, 29 Apr 2009 21:59:45 GMT

I have just read that, and it says that it is urine that is tested and not blood??? have I read it wrong? as I thought the poster said a blood test

Re: metacam

Anonymous — Wed, 29 Apr 2009 21:53:56 GMT

in case anyone is interested. I looked it up. http://www.vetbta.com/V-BTA%20Package%20Insert.html

Re: metacam

Sandra Taylor RVN, MBVNA — Wed, 29 Apr 2009 21:52:49 GMT

Never heard of it, so what analytes exactly are they looking for? and would it not be easier to scan the bladder for that?

Re: metacam

Mac Feather — Wed, 29 Apr 2009 21:21:56 GMT

[quote user="STRVN"]

Excuse my ignorance but what is a V-BTA test?

[/quote]

I was wondering the same thing Sandra.

Re: metacam

Lyn — Wed, 29 Apr 2009 21:21:19 GMT

testing for bladder tumour/cancer....

Re: metacam

Lyn — Wed, 29 Apr 2009 21:20:11 GMT

BTA is Blood Test Analytes, which is more common on humans.

The V just indicates veterinary. The majority of the vets in the practice had no knowledge of this test.... Idexx do it!!

Re: metacam

Sandra Taylor RVN, MBVNA — Wed, 29 Apr 2009 21:18:02 GMT

Excuse my ignorance but what is a V-BTA test?