OBJECTIVE: To determine the frequency of enteropathogens in dogs entering an animal shelter with normal feces or diarrhea. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study. ANIMALS: 100 dogs evaluated at an open-admission municipal animal shelter in Florida. PROCEDURES: Fecal samples were collected within 24 hours after admission from 50 dogs with normal feces and 50 dogs with diarrhea. Feces were tested by fecal flotation, antigen testing, PCR assay, and electron microscopy for selected enteropathogens. RESULTS: 13 enteropathogens were identified. Dogs with diarrhea were significantly more likely to be infected with ≥ 1 enteropathogens (96%) than were dogs with normal feces (78%). Only Clostridium perfringens enterotoxin A gene was significantly more common in dogs with diarrhea (64%) than in dogs with normal feces (40%). Other enteropathogens identified in dogs with and without diarrhea included hookworms (58% and 48%, respectively), Giardia spp (22% and 16%, respectively), canine enteric coronavirus (2% and 18%, respectively), whipworms (12% and 8%, respectively), Cryptosporidium spp (12% and 2%, respectively), ascarids (8% and 8%, respectively), Salmonella spp (2% and 6%, respectively), Cystoisospora spp (2% and 4%, respectively), canine distemper virus (8% and 0%, respectively), Dipylidium caninum (2% and 2%, respectively), canine parvovirus (2% and 2%, respectively), and rotavirus (2% and 0%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Dogs entered the shelter with a variety of enteropathogens, many of which are pathogenic or zoonotic. Most infections were not associated with diarrhea or any specific dog characteristics, making it difficult to predict the risk of infection for individual animals. Guidelines for preventive measures and empirical treatments that are logistically and financially feasible for use in shelters should be developed for control of the most common and important enteropathogens.
OBJECTIVE: To determine the frequency of enteropathogens in dogs entering an animal shelter with normal feces or diarrhea. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study. ANIMALS: 100 dogs evaluated at an open-admission municipal animal shelter in Florida. PROCEDURES: Fecal samples were collected within 24 hours after admission from 50 dogs with normal feces and 50 dogs with diarrhea. Feces were tested by fecal flotation, antigen testing, PCR assay, and electron microscopy for selected enteropathogens. RESULTS: 13 enteropathogens were identified. Dogs with diarrhea were significantly more likely to be infected with ≥ 1 enteropathogens (96%) than were dogs with normal feces (78%). Only Clostridium perfringens enterotoxin A gene was significantly more common in dogs with diarrhea (64%) than in dogs with normal feces (40%). Other enteropathogens identified in dogs with and without diarrhea included hookworms (58% and 48%, respectively), Giardia spp (22% and 16%, respectively), canine enteric coronavirus (2% and 18%, respectively), whipworms (12% and 8%, respectively), Cryptosporidium spp (12% and 2%, respectively), ascarids (8% and 8%, respectively), Salmonella spp (2% and 6%, respectively), Cystoisospora spp (2% and 4%, respectively), canine distemper virus (8% and 0%, respectively), Dipylidium caninum (2% and 2%, respectively), canine parvovirus (2% and 2%, respectively), and rotavirus (2% and 0%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Dogs entered the shelter with a variety of enteropathogens, many of which are pathogenic or zoonotic. Most infections were not associated with diarrhea or any specific dog characteristics, making it difficult to predict the risk of infection for individual animals. Guidelines for preventive measures and empirical treatments that are logistically and financially feasible for use in shelters should be developed for control of the most common and important enteropathogens.
Authors: Carys A Pugh; B Mark de C Bronsvoort; Ian G Handel; Damon Querry; Erica Rose; Kim M Summers; Dylan N Clements Journal: Prev Vet Med Date: 2017-02-27 Impact factor: 2.670
Authors: Renate Reimschuessel; Michael Grabenstein; Jake Guag; Sarah M Nemser; Kyunghee Song; Junshan Qiu; Kristin A Clothier; Barbara A Byrne; Stanley L Marks; Kyran Cadmus; Kristy Pabilonia; Susan Sanchez; Sreekumari Rajeev; Steve Ensley; Timothy S Frana; Albert E Jergens; Kimberly H Chappell; Siddhartha Thakur; Beverly Byrum; Jing Cui; Yan Zhang; Matthew M Erdman; Shelley C Rankin; Russell Daly; Seema Das; Laura Ruesch; Sara D Lawhon; Shuping Zhang; Timothy Baszler; Dubraska Diaz-Campos; Faye Hartmann; Ogi Okwumabua Journal: J Clin Microbiol Date: 2017-02-15 Impact factor: 5.948
Authors: Paloma S Moreno; Josef Wagner; Caroline S Mansfield; Matthew Stevens; James R Gilkerson; Carl D Kirkwood Journal: PLoS One Date: 2017-06-01 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: A Grellet; R M Heilmann; B Polack; A Feugier; C Boucraut-Baralon; D Grandjean; N Grützner; J S Suchodolski; J M Steiner; S Chastant-Maillard Journal: J Vet Intern Med Date: 2016-06-08 Impact factor: 3.333
Authors: Aline Baumann da Rocha Gizzi; Simone Tostes Oliveira; Christian M Leutenegger; Marko Estrada; Denise Adamczyk Kozemjakin; Rafael Stedile; Mary Marcondes; Alexander Welker Biondo Journal: BMC Vet Res Date: 2014-01-16 Impact factor: 2.741