Peer-reviewed veterinary case report
How skin prick and intradermal allergy tests compare in dogs
By Fleischman, Drew A & Morris, Daniel O·Published in Veterinary dermatology·2023·Department of Clinical Studies & Advanced Medicine, United States·View original on PubMed →
PetCaseFinder translated the abstract of this peer-reviewed paper into plain English so pet owners can read it. We do not publish original research — every detail traces back to the citation above. How we work →
Original publication title: Pilot study to determine the concordance between skin prick and intradermal test (IDT) reactivity to environmental allergens in atopic dogs using IDT as the gold standard.
- Species:
- dog
Plain-English summary
A group of 40 dogs with atopic dermatitis (a skin allergy condition) underwent two types of allergy tests: skin prick testing and intradermal testing. The skin prick test showed good specificity, meaning it correctly identified dogs that did not have allergies, but it was not very sensitive, missing many dogs that did have allergies. In fact, most dogs tested did not react to the allergen mixes used, even though they had positive reactions to individual allergens. This suggests that skin prick testing may not be the best choice for identifying specific allergies in dogs, and future tests should focus on individual allergens for better accuracy.
People also search for: dog skin allergy testing · atopic dermatitis in dogs · skin prick test for dog allergies
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Prick testing is widely used as the first-line in vivo test for environmental allergens in people owing to its noninvasive nature and speed of performance. OBJECTIVES: To determine concordance between skin prick testing (SPT) and intradermal testing (IDT) reactivity to environmental allergen mixes in dogs with atopic dermatitis (cAD). ANIMALS: Forty client-owned dogs with cAD. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Skin prick testing (GREER Pick System; Stallergenes Greer) and IDT were performed on 40 dogs using seven glycerinated and aqueous environmental allergen mixes, respectively (tree, grass and weed pollens, house dust mites and three mould mixes). Reactions for IDT and SPT were evaluated both subjectively and objectively (mean wheal diameter; MWD) and compared to saline and histamine controls. RESULTS: Using IDT as the gold standard, with subjective scoring, SPT was 47.0% sensitive [95% confidence interval (CI) 36.0%-58.7%], 92.1% specific (95% CI 87.6%-95.3%) and agreement was moderate (79%, Cohen's kappa = 0.424). The positive predictive value of SPT was 36% and negative predictive value was 95%. Objective and subjective scores had only fair agreement. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Skin prick testing with allergen mixes was specific yet poorly sensitive as compared to IDT. For both IDT and SPT, 95% (38 of 40) dogs failed to react to an allergen mix, despite showing a positive reaction to at least one component. Future studies comparing SPT and IDT should test individual allergens rather than mixes to prevent the dilution of individual components, which may have resulted in false negatives.
Find similar cases for your pet
PetCaseFinder finds other peer-reviewed reports of pets with the same symptoms, plus a plain-English summary of what was tried across them.
Search related cases →Original publication on PubMed: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37382082/