Veterinary surgeons are being advised against taking a heavy handed approach to hyperthyroidism by key opinion leaders, including Professor Danielle Gunn-Moore, a Specialist in Feline Medicine at the Royal (Dick) School of Veterinary Studies in Edinburgh.
Professor Gunn-Moore said: "Hyperthyroidism is not a condition that develops suddenly. It is a slowly progressive disease. The cat's body adapts to being hyperthyroid over a relatively long period of time. That is why it is best to return it to a euthyroid state in a controlled manner, rather than trying to crash the thyroxine concentration back down to normal as quickly as possible. Too fast a fall in thyroxine concentration can significantly exacerbate renal compromise and may cause serious harm.
"My recommendation is that you should start with a low dose of anti-thyroid medication and increase it if needed, after assessing the initial response to treatment. Any increase should be made in the smallest increments possible."
Dechra Veterinary Products - makers of Felimazole, the first medical treatment licensed in Europe for feline hyperthyroidism - is inviting vets to stand 700/701 at the BSAVA Congress to find out more about the latest thinking and new research which shows that treatment of hyperthyroid cats can result in iatrogenic hypothyroidism, that hyperthyroid cats are significantly more likely to develop azotaemia than euthyroid cats, and that hypothyroid cats that developed azotaemia have significantly shorter survival times.1
Further information on Felimazole is available by calling 01939 211 200 or visiting http://www.dechra.com/
References:1. Williams, T. et al (2010) JVIM 24: 1086-1092
PS: Whilst you're here, take a moment to see our latest job opportunities for vets.
Is expert opinion 'sponsored' by drug companies due more scrutiny than if truly independent
What if owners are unable to give pills?
robloxley - on the face of it, yes, sponsored expert opinion is surely due more scrutiny.
But, in my experience doing the PR for Novartis for many years, expert opinions were always, without exception, genuinely held. Indeed, those experts I worked with themselves demanded greater scrutiny of ideas and research put forward in the first instance by drugs companies.
So I think it is probably not overtly sponsored opinions that are due greater scrutiny, but those where the commercial association is not immediately obvious.