| Literature DB >> 25302603 |
Heli Nordgren1, Kirsi Aaltonen2, Tarja Sironen2, Paula M Kinnunen3, Ilkka Kivistö4, Mirja Raunio-Saarnisto5, Anna-Maria Moisander-Jylhä6, Johanna Korpela6, Ulla-Maija Kokkonen7, Udo Hetzel3, Antti Sukura3, Olli Vapalahti8.
Abstract
A new type of pyoderma was detected in Finnish fur animals in 2007. The disease continues to spread within and between farms, with severe and potentially fatal symptoms. It compromises animal welfare and causes considerable economic losses to farmers. A case-control study was performed in 2010-2011 to describe the entity and to identify the causative agent. Altogether 99 fur animals were necropsied followed by pathological and microbiological examination. The data indicated that the disease clinically manifests in mink (Neovison vison) by necrotic dermatitis of the feet and facial skin. In finnraccoons (Nyctereutes procyonoides), it causes painful abscesses in the paws. Foxes (Vulpes lagopus) are affected by severe conjunctivitis and the infection rapidly spreads to the eyelids and facial skin. A common finding at necropsy was necrotic pyoderma. Microbiological analysis revealed the presence of a number of potential causative agents, including a novel Streptococcus sp. The common finding from all diseased animals of all species was Arcanobacterium phocae. This bacterium has previously been isolated from marine mammals with skin lesions but this is the first report of A. phocae isolated in fur animals with pyoderma. The results obtained from this study implicate A. phocae as a potential causative pathogen of fur animal epidemic necrotic pyoderma (FENP) and support observations that the epidemic may have originated in a species-shift of the causative agent from marine mammals. The variable disease pattern and the presence of other infectious agents (in particular the novel Streptococcus sp.) suggest a multifactorial etiology for FENP, and further studies are needed to determine the environmental, immunological and infectious factors contributing to the disease.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2014 PMID: 25302603 PMCID: PMC4193818 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0110210
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Figure 1Macroscopic changes in FENP in mink, foxes and finnraccoons.
A typical macroscopic finding in a mink with FENP is severe necrotic pyoderma with crust formation around the eyes and nose. Some bedding material is detached in the exudate (A). A typical lesion in foxes with FENP is observed around the eyes. The eyelids clot together due to the purulent inflammation (B). Finnraccoons with FENP have painful abscesses between the toes (C).
Gross pathology of the study animals.
| Macroscopic change | Mink (n = 21) | Foxes (n = 19) | Finnraccoons (n = 21) |
|
| 5 (22%) | 3 (16%) | 10 (48%) |
|
| 10 (48%) | 0 | 10 (48%) |
|
| 15 (71%) | 3 (16%) | 0 |
|
| 6 (29%) | 0 | 21 (100%) |
|
| 0 | 17 (89%) | 0 |
|
| 0 | 2 (11%) | 0 |
|
| 0 | 11 (58%) | 0 |
|
| 0 | 8 (42%) | 0 |
Figure 2Histopathological findings in FENP in mink and finnraccoons.
A facial skin section from mink shows chronic, deep, and diffuse neutrophilic inflammation with hemorrhage, ulceration, and crusting (A). Severe orthokeratotic hyperkeratosis detected in a skin section from a mink foot (B). A sample of a section from the skin of the eyelid of a healthy control mink is shown in (C). A section from a diseased finnraccoon paw with abscess between the toes shows chronic, deep and diffuse neutrophilic inflammation with ulceration and crusting (D). Necropurulent inflammation in the subcutis is demonstrated in (E), and a section from the skin of a paw of a healthy control finnraccoon in (F). All sections are stained with hematoxylin and eosin, and the respective objectives used in A to F were 10×, 10×, 4×, 4×, 40× and, 4×.
Detection of Arcanobacterium phocae and Streptococcus spp. in fur animals, and their association to disease signs of FENP.
| PCR positive for | Positive for | Positive for | ||||
|
|
|
| ||||
|
| 21 (21) | <0.001 | 16 (21) | <0.001 | 16 (21) | <0.001 |
| Healthy mink | 1 (11) | 0 (11) | 0 (11) | |||
| Healthy mink on a diseased farm | 3 (4) | 0 (4) | 0 (4) | |||
|
| 20 (20) | <0.01 | 8 (20) | 0.068 | 10 (20) | <0.01 |
| Healthy finnraccoons | 6 (11) | 1 (11) | 0 (11) | |||
|
| 19 (19) | <0.001 | 6 (19) | 0.036 | 2 (19) | 0.3677 |
| Healthy foxes | 0 (12) | 0 (12) | 0 (12) | |||
|
| 60 (60) | <0.001 | 30 (60) | <0.001 | 28 (60) | <0.001 |
| All healthy animals | 10 (38) | 1 (38) | 0 (38) | |||
The table shows the probabilities of getting a positive result from diseased animals as opposed to healthy animals.
* Calculated from Fisher's exact test.