Comparison of three progesterone quantification methods using blood samples drawn from bitches during the periovulatory phase

Research (Published online: 24-01-2022)

15. Comparison of three progesterone quantification methods using blood samples drawn from bitches during the periovulatory phase

Hassan A. Hussein, Gerhard Schuler, Theresa Conze and Axel Wehrend

Veterinary World, 15(1): 119-123

Hassan A. Hussein: Department of Theriogenology, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Assiut University, Assiut, Egypt; Clinic for Obstetrics, Gynaecology and Andrology of Large and Small Animals with Veterinary Ambulance, Justus Liebig University, Giessen, Germany.

Gerhard Schuler: Clinic for Obstetrics, Gynaecology and Andrology of Large and Small Animals with Veterinary Ambulance, Justus Liebig University, Giessen, Germany.

Theresa Conze: Clinic for Obstetrics, Gynaecology and Andrology of Large and Small Animals with Veterinary Ambulance, Justus Liebig University, Giessen, Germany.

Axel Wehrend: Clinic for Obstetrics, Gynaecology and Andrology of Large and Small Animals with Veterinary Ambulance, Justus Liebig University, Giessen, Germany.

doi: www.doi.org/10.14202/vetworld.2022.119-123

Share this article on [Facebook] [LinkedIn]

Article history: Received: 11-05-2021, Accepted: 17-12-2021, Published online: 24-01-2022

Corresponding authors: Axel Wehrend

E-mail: axel.wehrend@vetmed.uni-giessen.de

Citation: Hussein HA, Schuler G, Conze T, Wehrend A (2022) Comparison of three progesterone quantification methods using blood samples drawn from bitches during the periovulatory phase, Veterinary World, 15(1): 119-123.

Abstract

Background and Aim: Measuring blood progesterone (P4) concentration has become an essential diagnostic tool in small animal reproductive medicine. Methods enabling precise and rapid on-site measurements are in high demand, especially for the optimization of breeding management in bitches. This study aimed to compare two commercial on-site methods (Speed™ P4, Virbac [M1] and mini VIDAS^®, bioMérieux [M2]) and a well-established radioimmunoassay (RIA), which was used as a reference method.

Materials and Methods: Comparative measurements were performed on 52 blood serum samples collected from 45 clinically healthy bitches of different breeds. The dogs had been presented to determine the estrus cycle stage and predict the time of ovulation. Each sample was divided into three aliquots. In aliquot 1, P4 was measured immediately applying M2. Aliquots 2 and 3 were stored at –20°C until analysis was performed using RIA and M1. The consistency of the three methods was investigated by pairwise linear regression analyses.

Results: In RIA, the P4 concentrations ranged between 1.1 and 25.4 ng/mL. Regression analyses revealed highly significant (p<0.0001) positive correlations between the three methods applied (M1 vs. RIA: R=0.94; M2 vs. RIA: R=0.98; and M1 vs. M2: R=0.91).

Conclusion: The results show that the two commercial on-site methods tested exhibit approximately equal, high consistency with the radioimmunological reference method and can, therefore, be used beneficially in a clinical setting. However, biological interpretation of data must be performed in a method-specific manner.

Keywords: dog, enzyme-linked immunofluorescence, immunochromatography, progesterone, radioimmunoassay.