| Literature DB >> 25890106 |
Guadalupe Miró1, Rocío Checa2, Andrea Paparini3, Nieves Ortega4, José Luís González-Fraga5, Alex Gofton6, Adrián Bartolomé7, Ana Montoya8, Rosa Gálvez9, Pedro Pablo Mayo10, Peter Irwin11.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: In north-western Spain, piroplamosis caused by Theileria annae is now recognized as a serious problem because veterinarians, despite being aware of the clinical signs of piroplasmosis, lack the necessary information on its epidemiology or specific diagnostic tools for its management. This, along with the fact that T. annae infection is also refractory to current piroplamosis treatments, prompted this study designed to assess the clinical presentation and diagnosis of this largely unknown parasitic disease in dogs.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2015 PMID: 25890106 PMCID: PMC4422000 DOI: 10.1186/s13071-015-0825-2
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Parasit Vectors ISSN: 1756-3305 Impact factor: 3.876
Figure 1Decision tree for the diagnostic approach to dogs with suspected clinical signs and/or clinicopathological abnormalities consistent with infection. Abbreviations: IFAT = immunofluorescence antibody test, LM = light microscopy, PCR = polymerase chain reaction.
Figure 2Intraerythrocytic ring-shaped bodies, morphologically compatible with . Giemsa stained blood smear (x1000).
Correlation between LM and PCR used to detect infection
|
| ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
| ||
| LM | NEGATIVE | 43 | 18 | 61 |
| POSITIVE | 2 | 57 | 59 | |
| TOTAL | 45 | 75 | 120 | |
Kappa 0.6680, specificity 95.56%, sensitivity 76%, positive predictive values (PPV) 96.61%, negative predictive values (NPV) 70.49%.
Correlation between IFAT and PCR used to detect infection
|
| ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
| ||
| IFAT | NEGATIVE | 41 | 20 | 61 |
| POSITIVE | 4 | 55 | 59 | |
| TOTAL | 45 | 75 | 120 | |
Kappa 0.6017, specificity 91.11%, sensitivity 73.33%, positive predictive values (PPV) 93.22%, negative predictive values (NPV) 67.21%.
Correlation between IFAT-LM and PCR used to detect infection
|
| ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
| ||
| LM & IFAT | NEGATIVE | 39 | 6 | 50 |
| POSITIVE | 11 | 64 | 70 | |
| TOTAL | 45 | 75 | 120 | |
Kappa 0.7043, specificity 86.66%, sensitivity 85.33%, positive predictive values (PPV) 91.42%, negative predictive values (NPV) 78%.
Descriptive statistics and comparative Student t-test for haematological variables recorded in infected (n = 75) and non-infected dogs (n =45)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
| ||||||
|
| I | 72* | 3.28 | 1.63 | 2.16 | 2.77 | 4.32 | <0.0001 |
| NI | 38* | 4.9 | 2.04 | 3.57 | 5.3 | 6.06 | ||
|
| I | 72 | 27.12 | 11.9 | 18.6 | 23.45 | 36.2 | 0.0019 |
| NI | 38 | 35.16 | 13.86 | 23.50 | 36.75 | 44.9 | ||
|
| I | 72 | 7.75 | 3.75 | 5 | 6.5 | 10.2 | <0.0001 |
| NI | 38 | 11.04 | 4.57 | 6.5 | 12 | 14.1 | ||
|
| I | 72 | 82.84 | 8.25 | 76 | 81.5 | 83.3 | 0.0088 |
| NI | 38 | 76.02 | 12.99 | 70.1 | 73 | 75.6 | ||
|
| I | 72 | 28.25 | 2.61 | 26.7 | 28.2 | 29.7 | <0.0001 |
| NI | 38 | 31.2 | 3.12 | 29.5 | 31.2 | 32.7 | ||
|
| I | 72 | 23.18 | 1.73 | 22.1 | 23.1 | 23.8 | 0.5552 |
| NI | 38 | 23.59 | 4.08 | 22.1 | 23 | 23.8 | ||
|
| I | 72 | 17.44 | 3.26 | 15.1 | 17.45 | 19.2 | 0.1385 |
| NI | 38 | 16.47 | 3.06 | 14.5 | 14.9 | 18.5 | ||
|
| I | 72 | 14.42 | 6.25 | 10.5 | 13.32 | 17.1 | 0.3649 |
| NI | 38 | 12.64 | 11.3 | 7.89 | 10.84 | 14.54 | ||
|
| I | 59 | 158.5 | 90.35 | 90 | 165 | 218 | 0.019 |
| NI | 33 | 211.2 | 121.25 | 150 | 212 | 272 | ||
*no data available for 3 infected and 7 non-infected dogs.
SD: standard deviation.
I = T. annae infected dog; NI = T. annae non-infected dogs.
Figure 3Results obtained using each diagnostic method by study area.
Epidemiological data recorded in 75 dogs infected with confirmed by PCR and sequencing
|
|
|
| |
|---|---|---|---|
| Age (years) | ≤3 | 65 | 53 (81.54)** |
| >3 | 47 | 22 (46.81) | |
| unknown | 8 | 0 | |
| Sex | Male | 58 | 38 (65.5) |
| Female | 55 | 37 (67.2) | |
| unknown | 7 | 0 | |
| Size (kg) | ≤22 | 77 | 59 (76.6)* |
| >22 | 35 | 16 (45.71) | |
| unknown | 8 | 0 | |
| Breed | Pure breed | 86 | 53 (61.6) |
| Crossbreed | 33 | 22 (66.6) | |
| unknown | 1 | 0 | |
| Lifestyle | Hunting | 75 | 56 (74.6)* |
| Companion | 28 | 13 (46.4) | |
| Guard | 12 | 6 (50) | |
| unknown | 5 | 0 | |
| Habitat | Rural | 96 | 64 (66.6) |
| Urban | 24 | 11 (45.8) | |
| Tick infestation | Yes | 50 | 35 (70) |
| No | 49 | 27 (55.1) | |
| unknown | 21 | 13 (10.8) | |
| Seasonality | spring | 20 | 14 (70) |
| summer | 20 | 10 (50) | |
| autumn | 60 | 38 (63.3) | |
| winter | 20 | 13 (65) | |
**p ≤ 0.0001; *p ≤ 0.02.