The Experts below are selected from a list of 2271 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform

Igino Andrighetto - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • Undeclared animal species in dry and wet novel and hydrolyzed protein diets for dogs and cats detected by microarray analysis.
    BMC veterinary research, 2018
    Co-Authors: Rebecca Ricci, Daniele Conficoni, Giada Morelli, Carmen Losasso, Leonardo Alberghini, Valerio Giaccone, Antonia Ricci, Igino Andrighetto
    Abstract:

    Although the European Pet Food Industry Federation (FEDIAF) stated that labels must be accurate and provide detailed information on the ingredients, mislabeling of pet Food has been documented by several authors. This phenomenon is of particular concern when related to products used as elimination diets for the diagnosis of Adverse Food Reaction (AFR) in dogs and cats because the presence of undeclared ingredients may negatively interfere with the trial and prevent the veterinarian from making an appropriate diagnosis. The aim of this study was to shed light upon the problem of contamination and mislabeling in both dry and wet novel protein diets (NPDs) and hydrolyzed protein diets (HPDs) using a microarray-based commercial kit which tests for the presence of 19 animal species. Of the 40 analyzed products (9 dry NPDs, 22 wet NPDs, 6 dry HPDs and 3 wet HPDs), ten presented a content that correctly matched the label, while five did not contain the declared animal species, twenty-three revealed the presence of undeclared animal species, and two had a vague label that did not allow the evaluation of its accuracy. The most frequently contaminants identified in both dry and wet pet Foods were pork, chicken and turkey. The presence of undeclared animal species was higher in dry than wet pet Foods; furthermore, a lower number of contaminating animal species was identified in HPDs than NPDs (4 vs 10), and a lower number of contaminated HPDs (6 out of 9, 67%) than contaminated NPDs was detected (24 out of 31, 77%). Thirteen out of 14 brands tested presented at least one mislabeled product. Mislabeling seems to be a widespread issue in pet Foods used as elimination diets. Contamination can occur in all types of products used for the purpose, although dry NPDs are the main issue. Due to the high risk of contamination, particular attention should be given to both the selection of raw material suppliers and the production process.

  • Undeclared animal species in dry and wet novel and hydrolyzed protein diets for dogs and cats detected by microarray analysis
    'Springer Science and Business Media LLC', 2018
    Co-Authors: Rebecca Ricci, Daniele Conficoni, Giada Morelli, Carmen Losasso, Leonardo Alberghini, Valerio Giaccone, Antonia Ricci, Igino Andrighetto
    Abstract:

    Abstract Background Although the European Pet Food Industry Federation (FEDIAF) stated that labels must be accurate and provide detailed information on the ingredients, mislabeling of pet Food has been documented by several authors. This phenomenon is of particular concern when related to products used as elimination diets for the diagnosis of Adverse Food Reaction (AFR) in dogs and cats because the presence of undeclared ingredients may negatively interfere with the trial and prevent the veterinarian from making an appropriate diagnosis. The aim of this study was to shed light upon the problem of contamination and mislabeling in both dry and wet novel protein diets (NPDs) and hydrolyzed protein diets (HPDs) using a microarray-based commercial kit which tests for the presence of 19 animal species. Results Of the 40 analyzed products (9 dry NPDs, 22 wet NPDs, 6 dry HPDs and 3 wet HPDs), ten presented a content that correctly matched the label, while five did not contain the declared animal species, twenty-three revealed the presence of undeclared animal species, and two had a vague label that did not allow the evaluation of its accuracy. The most frequently contaminants identified in both dry and wet pet Foods were pork, chicken and turkey. The presence of undeclared animal species was higher in dry than wet pet Foods; furthermore, a lower number of contaminating animal species was identified in HPDs than NPDs (4 vs 10), and a lower number of contaminated HPDs (6 out of 9, 67%) than contaminated NPDs was detected (24 out of 31, 77%). Thirteen out of 14 brands tested presented at least one mislabeled product. Conclusions Mislabeling seems to be a widespread issue in pet Foods used as elimination diets. Contamination can occur in all types of products used for the purpose, although dry NPDs are the main issue. Due to the high risk of contamination, particular attention should be given to both the selection of raw material suppliers and the production process

  • identification of undeclared sources of animal origin in canine dry Foods used in dietary elimination trials
    Journal of Animal Physiology and Animal Nutrition, 2013
    Co-Authors: Rebecca Ricci, Igino Andrighetto, A Granato, Marta Vascellari, M Boscarato, Cl Palagiano, Marianne Diez, Franco Mutinelli
    Abstract:

    Summary Failure to respond to commercial limited antigen diets can occur in dogs kept on a dietary trial for the diagnosis of Adverse Food Reaction (AFR). The aim of this study was to assess twelve canine dry limited antigen diets (eleven novel protein diets and one hydrolysed diet) for potential contamination by ingredients of animal origin not mentioned on the label. The validity of the two methods adopted for the detection of such Food antigens was also evaluated. Each dietary product was analysed by microscopy analysis using the official method described in Commission Regulation EC 152/2009 with the aim of identifying bone fragments of different zoological classes (mammalian, avian and fish) and by polymerase chain Reaction (PCR) for the identification of DNA of animal origin. Discrepancies between the results obtained by PCR and/or microscopy analysis and the ingredients listed on pet Food packages were found. Only in two pet Foods did the results of both analyses match the ingredients listed on the label. In the remaining ten samples, microscopy detected bone fragments from one or two unpredicted zoological classes, revealing avian fragments in six of ten samples followed by those of fish in five of ten and mammalian fragments in four of ten. In two samples, microscopy analysis identified a contamination that would have otherwise passed unobserved if only PCR had been used. However, PCR confirmed the presence of all the zoological classes detected by microscopy and also identified the DNA of an additional unexpected zoological class in two samples. Dogs might fail to respond to commercial limited antigen diets because such diets are contaminated with potential allergens. Both PCR and microscopy analysis are required to guarantee the absence of undeclared animal sources in pet Foods. Before ruling out AFR, a novel protein home-made diet should be considered if the dog is unresponsive to a commercial regimen.

Rebecca Ricci - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • Undeclared animal species in dry and wet novel and hydrolyzed protein diets for dogs and cats detected by microarray analysis.
    BMC veterinary research, 2018
    Co-Authors: Rebecca Ricci, Daniele Conficoni, Giada Morelli, Carmen Losasso, Leonardo Alberghini, Valerio Giaccone, Antonia Ricci, Igino Andrighetto
    Abstract:

    Although the European Pet Food Industry Federation (FEDIAF) stated that labels must be accurate and provide detailed information on the ingredients, mislabeling of pet Food has been documented by several authors. This phenomenon is of particular concern when related to products used as elimination diets for the diagnosis of Adverse Food Reaction (AFR) in dogs and cats because the presence of undeclared ingredients may negatively interfere with the trial and prevent the veterinarian from making an appropriate diagnosis. The aim of this study was to shed light upon the problem of contamination and mislabeling in both dry and wet novel protein diets (NPDs) and hydrolyzed protein diets (HPDs) using a microarray-based commercial kit which tests for the presence of 19 animal species. Of the 40 analyzed products (9 dry NPDs, 22 wet NPDs, 6 dry HPDs and 3 wet HPDs), ten presented a content that correctly matched the label, while five did not contain the declared animal species, twenty-three revealed the presence of undeclared animal species, and two had a vague label that did not allow the evaluation of its accuracy. The most frequently contaminants identified in both dry and wet pet Foods were pork, chicken and turkey. The presence of undeclared animal species was higher in dry than wet pet Foods; furthermore, a lower number of contaminating animal species was identified in HPDs than NPDs (4 vs 10), and a lower number of contaminated HPDs (6 out of 9, 67%) than contaminated NPDs was detected (24 out of 31, 77%). Thirteen out of 14 brands tested presented at least one mislabeled product. Mislabeling seems to be a widespread issue in pet Foods used as elimination diets. Contamination can occur in all types of products used for the purpose, although dry NPDs are the main issue. Due to the high risk of contamination, particular attention should be given to both the selection of raw material suppliers and the production process.

  • Undeclared animal species in dry and wet novel and hydrolyzed protein diets for dogs and cats detected by microarray analysis
    'Springer Science and Business Media LLC', 2018
    Co-Authors: Rebecca Ricci, Daniele Conficoni, Giada Morelli, Carmen Losasso, Leonardo Alberghini, Valerio Giaccone, Antonia Ricci, Igino Andrighetto
    Abstract:

    Abstract Background Although the European Pet Food Industry Federation (FEDIAF) stated that labels must be accurate and provide detailed information on the ingredients, mislabeling of pet Food has been documented by several authors. This phenomenon is of particular concern when related to products used as elimination diets for the diagnosis of Adverse Food Reaction (AFR) in dogs and cats because the presence of undeclared ingredients may negatively interfere with the trial and prevent the veterinarian from making an appropriate diagnosis. The aim of this study was to shed light upon the problem of contamination and mislabeling in both dry and wet novel protein diets (NPDs) and hydrolyzed protein diets (HPDs) using a microarray-based commercial kit which tests for the presence of 19 animal species. Results Of the 40 analyzed products (9 dry NPDs, 22 wet NPDs, 6 dry HPDs and 3 wet HPDs), ten presented a content that correctly matched the label, while five did not contain the declared animal species, twenty-three revealed the presence of undeclared animal species, and two had a vague label that did not allow the evaluation of its accuracy. The most frequently contaminants identified in both dry and wet pet Foods were pork, chicken and turkey. The presence of undeclared animal species was higher in dry than wet pet Foods; furthermore, a lower number of contaminating animal species was identified in HPDs than NPDs (4 vs 10), and a lower number of contaminated HPDs (6 out of 9, 67%) than contaminated NPDs was detected (24 out of 31, 77%). Thirteen out of 14 brands tested presented at least one mislabeled product. Conclusions Mislabeling seems to be a widespread issue in pet Foods used as elimination diets. Contamination can occur in all types of products used for the purpose, although dry NPDs are the main issue. Due to the high risk of contamination, particular attention should be given to both the selection of raw material suppliers and the production process

  • identification of undeclared sources of animal origin in canine dry Foods used in dietary elimination trials
    Journal of Animal Physiology and Animal Nutrition, 2013
    Co-Authors: Rebecca Ricci, Igino Andrighetto, A Granato, Marta Vascellari, M Boscarato, Cl Palagiano, Marianne Diez, Franco Mutinelli
    Abstract:

    Summary Failure to respond to commercial limited antigen diets can occur in dogs kept on a dietary trial for the diagnosis of Adverse Food Reaction (AFR). The aim of this study was to assess twelve canine dry limited antigen diets (eleven novel protein diets and one hydrolysed diet) for potential contamination by ingredients of animal origin not mentioned on the label. The validity of the two methods adopted for the detection of such Food antigens was also evaluated. Each dietary product was analysed by microscopy analysis using the official method described in Commission Regulation EC 152/2009 with the aim of identifying bone fragments of different zoological classes (mammalian, avian and fish) and by polymerase chain Reaction (PCR) for the identification of DNA of animal origin. Discrepancies between the results obtained by PCR and/or microscopy analysis and the ingredients listed on pet Food packages were found. Only in two pet Foods did the results of both analyses match the ingredients listed on the label. In the remaining ten samples, microscopy detected bone fragments from one or two unpredicted zoological classes, revealing avian fragments in six of ten samples followed by those of fish in five of ten and mammalian fragments in four of ten. In two samples, microscopy analysis identified a contamination that would have otherwise passed unobserved if only PCR had been used. However, PCR confirmed the presence of all the zoological classes detected by microscopy and also identified the DNA of an additional unexpected zoological class in two samples. Dogs might fail to respond to commercial limited antigen diets because such diets are contaminated with potential allergens. Both PCR and microscopy analysis are required to guarantee the absence of undeclared animal sources in pet Foods. Before ruling out AFR, a novel protein home-made diet should be considered if the dog is unresponsive to a commercial regimen.

Kathy L Gross - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • successful nutritional control of scratching and clinical signs associated with Adverse Food Reaction a randomized controlled coscad 18 adherent clinical trial in dogs in the united kingdom
    Journal of Veterinary Internal Medicine, 2021
    Co-Authors: James L Weemhoff, Jennifer M Macleay, John J Brejda, Heidi Schiefelbein, Susan M Wernimont, Kathy L Gross
    Abstract:

    Background Adverse Reactions to Food are a common dermatological condition in dogs, requiring nutritional intervention using a novel or hydrolysate protein-based Food. Objective To evaluate a therapeutic Food containing egg and phytonutrients in dogs with Food allergies using an activity monitor and core outcome set for canine atopic dermatitis (COSCAD'18) guidelines and in a controlled double-masked, multicenter, prospective clinical trial. Animals Adult dogs with a history of Adverse Food Reaction as diagnosed by a Food elimination trial were recruited from general practices. Methods After a 21-day baseline period, dogs were randomized to test or positive control (hydrolyzed protein) Food for 21 days. Owner (pruritus visual analog score [PVAS], coat quality, Food acceptance, and satisfaction) and veterinarian (canine atopic dermatitis lesion index [CADLI], physical examination) assessments were completed on days 0, 21, and 42. Dogs wore a collar-mounted activity monitor to record scratching and shaking behavior throughout the study. Statistical analysis included within-group comparison to baseline and between-group comparison at study end using a significance threshold of alpha = 0.05. Results At the end of the treatment period, all results were similar between groups for CADLI, PVAS, owner satisfaction, activity, and questionnaire data. Scores for hair dullness, brittleness, amount of dandruff, feces quality, and Food acceptance were positive and not statistically different between groups. Conclusions and clinical importance The therapeutic test Food was well-accepted and efficacious in managing signs of Adverse Reactions to Food compared to baseline as well as compared to the positive control Food.

James L Weemhoff - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • successful nutritional control of scratching and clinical signs associated with Adverse Food Reaction a randomized controlled coscad 18 adherent clinical trial in dogs in the united kingdom
    Journal of Veterinary Internal Medicine, 2021
    Co-Authors: James L Weemhoff, Jennifer M Macleay, John J Brejda, Heidi Schiefelbein, Susan M Wernimont, Kathy L Gross
    Abstract:

    Background Adverse Reactions to Food are a common dermatological condition in dogs, requiring nutritional intervention using a novel or hydrolysate protein-based Food. Objective To evaluate a therapeutic Food containing egg and phytonutrients in dogs with Food allergies using an activity monitor and core outcome set for canine atopic dermatitis (COSCAD'18) guidelines and in a controlled double-masked, multicenter, prospective clinical trial. Animals Adult dogs with a history of Adverse Food Reaction as diagnosed by a Food elimination trial were recruited from general practices. Methods After a 21-day baseline period, dogs were randomized to test or positive control (hydrolyzed protein) Food for 21 days. Owner (pruritus visual analog score [PVAS], coat quality, Food acceptance, and satisfaction) and veterinarian (canine atopic dermatitis lesion index [CADLI], physical examination) assessments were completed on days 0, 21, and 42. Dogs wore a collar-mounted activity monitor to record scratching and shaking behavior throughout the study. Statistical analysis included within-group comparison to baseline and between-group comparison at study end using a significance threshold of alpha = 0.05. Results At the end of the treatment period, all results were similar between groups for CADLI, PVAS, owner satisfaction, activity, and questionnaire data. Scores for hair dullness, brittleness, amount of dandruff, feces quality, and Food acceptance were positive and not statistically different between groups. Conclusions and clinical importance The therapeutic test Food was well-accepted and efficacious in managing signs of Adverse Reactions to Food compared to baseline as well as compared to the positive control Food.

Giada Morelli - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • Undeclared animal species in dry and wet novel and hydrolyzed protein diets for dogs and cats detected by microarray analysis.
    BMC veterinary research, 2018
    Co-Authors: Rebecca Ricci, Daniele Conficoni, Giada Morelli, Carmen Losasso, Leonardo Alberghini, Valerio Giaccone, Antonia Ricci, Igino Andrighetto
    Abstract:

    Although the European Pet Food Industry Federation (FEDIAF) stated that labels must be accurate and provide detailed information on the ingredients, mislabeling of pet Food has been documented by several authors. This phenomenon is of particular concern when related to products used as elimination diets for the diagnosis of Adverse Food Reaction (AFR) in dogs and cats because the presence of undeclared ingredients may negatively interfere with the trial and prevent the veterinarian from making an appropriate diagnosis. The aim of this study was to shed light upon the problem of contamination and mislabeling in both dry and wet novel protein diets (NPDs) and hydrolyzed protein diets (HPDs) using a microarray-based commercial kit which tests for the presence of 19 animal species. Of the 40 analyzed products (9 dry NPDs, 22 wet NPDs, 6 dry HPDs and 3 wet HPDs), ten presented a content that correctly matched the label, while five did not contain the declared animal species, twenty-three revealed the presence of undeclared animal species, and two had a vague label that did not allow the evaluation of its accuracy. The most frequently contaminants identified in both dry and wet pet Foods were pork, chicken and turkey. The presence of undeclared animal species was higher in dry than wet pet Foods; furthermore, a lower number of contaminating animal species was identified in HPDs than NPDs (4 vs 10), and a lower number of contaminated HPDs (6 out of 9, 67%) than contaminated NPDs was detected (24 out of 31, 77%). Thirteen out of 14 brands tested presented at least one mislabeled product. Mislabeling seems to be a widespread issue in pet Foods used as elimination diets. Contamination can occur in all types of products used for the purpose, although dry NPDs are the main issue. Due to the high risk of contamination, particular attention should be given to both the selection of raw material suppliers and the production process.

  • Undeclared animal species in dry and wet novel and hydrolyzed protein diets for dogs and cats detected by microarray analysis
    'Springer Science and Business Media LLC', 2018
    Co-Authors: Rebecca Ricci, Daniele Conficoni, Giada Morelli, Carmen Losasso, Leonardo Alberghini, Valerio Giaccone, Antonia Ricci, Igino Andrighetto
    Abstract:

    Abstract Background Although the European Pet Food Industry Federation (FEDIAF) stated that labels must be accurate and provide detailed information on the ingredients, mislabeling of pet Food has been documented by several authors. This phenomenon is of particular concern when related to products used as elimination diets for the diagnosis of Adverse Food Reaction (AFR) in dogs and cats because the presence of undeclared ingredients may negatively interfere with the trial and prevent the veterinarian from making an appropriate diagnosis. The aim of this study was to shed light upon the problem of contamination and mislabeling in both dry and wet novel protein diets (NPDs) and hydrolyzed protein diets (HPDs) using a microarray-based commercial kit which tests for the presence of 19 animal species. Results Of the 40 analyzed products (9 dry NPDs, 22 wet NPDs, 6 dry HPDs and 3 wet HPDs), ten presented a content that correctly matched the label, while five did not contain the declared animal species, twenty-three revealed the presence of undeclared animal species, and two had a vague label that did not allow the evaluation of its accuracy. The most frequently contaminants identified in both dry and wet pet Foods were pork, chicken and turkey. The presence of undeclared animal species was higher in dry than wet pet Foods; furthermore, a lower number of contaminating animal species was identified in HPDs than NPDs (4 vs 10), and a lower number of contaminated HPDs (6 out of 9, 67%) than contaminated NPDs was detected (24 out of 31, 77%). Thirteen out of 14 brands tested presented at least one mislabeled product. Conclusions Mislabeling seems to be a widespread issue in pet Foods used as elimination diets. Contamination can occur in all types of products used for the purpose, although dry NPDs are the main issue. Due to the high risk of contamination, particular attention should be given to both the selection of raw material suppliers and the production process