| Literature DB >> 32848310 |
Amel Kiouani1, N Azzag1, S Tennah1, F Ghalmi1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND AIM: Canine babesiosis is a vector-borne disease transmitted by ticks of the Ixodidae family. The effects of infection in dogs can range from the subclinical to the severe lethal form. This study aimed to make an original contribution to the knowledge of circulating species of Babesia spp. in dogs in the region of Algiers as well as mechanisms and risk factors for their transmission.Entities:
Keywords: Algiers; Babesia canis; Babesia spp; blood smears; dogs; prevalence; risk factors; serology; ticks
Year: 2020 PMID: 32848310 PMCID: PMC7429378 DOI: 10.14202/vetworld.2020.1351-1357
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Vet World ISSN: 0972-8988
Prevalence of anti-Babesia canis antibodies in different canine populations.
| Canine population | Negative | Positive | Total | Prevalence % (IC 95%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Canine pound | 128 | 31 | 159 | 19.49% (12.77-25.22) |
| Pet | 08 | 2 | 10 | 20% (0-45.25) |
| Farm | 14 | 1 | 15 | 6.66% (0-18) |
| Hunting | 5 | 0 | 5 | 0% |
| Total | 155 | 34 | 189 | 17.98% (11.53-22.46) |
Distribution of antibodies titer anti-Babesia canis in function of dogs’ populations.
| Dogs titers | Canine pound | Pet | Hunting | Farm | Total positive |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 32 | 31 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 34 |
| 64 | 25/31 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 28/34 |
| 128 | 22/31 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 22/34 |
| 256 | 15/31 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 15/34 |
Comparison of the BS technique with the IFAT (titer ≥1/32) as a reference test for the diagnosis of Babesia canis.
| Tests for the diagnosis of | IFAT | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| + | − | Total | ||
| Blood smears (3/25) large Babesia | + | 1 | 2 | 3 |
| − | 33 | 153 | 186 | |
| Total Intrinsic values | 34 | 155 | 189 | |
| Se=3% | Sp=99% | RA=81% | ||
| Kappa=0.80 | ||||
Se=Sensitivity, Sp=Specificity, RA=Accuracy, IFAT=Indirect fluorescent antibody test
Analysis of some potential risk factors that may influence the seroprevalence of Babesia canis.
| Variables | n | Number of positives | Seroprevalence (%) (95% CI) | p-value |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Gender | ||||
| Female | 77 | 10 | 12.98 (4.59-19.40) | |
| Male | 112 | 24 | 21.42 (13.30-28.69) | >0.1 |
| Age (months) | ||||
| <6 | 67 | 7 | 10.44 (2.66-17.33) | <0.05 |
| >6 | 122 | 27 | 22.13 (14.49-29.50) | |
| Ticks | ||||
| Presence | 59 | 19 | 32.20 (19.85-44.14) | |
| Absence | 130 | 15 | 11.53 (5.5-16.48) | <0.0001 |
| Season | ||||
| Autumn | 60 | 3 | 5 (0-10.62) | |
| Summer | 47 | 9 | 19.14 (7.55-30.44) | |
| Winter | 28 | 0 | 0 | <0.0001 |
| Spring | 54 | 22 | 40.74 (26.66-53.33) |
Analysis of risk factors that may influence infestation of dog by ticks.
| Variables | n | Number of positives | Infestation rate by ticks (%) (95% CI) | p-value |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Gender | ||||
| Female | 77 | 23 | 29.87 (18.65-39.34) | |
| Male | 112 | 36 | 32.14 (23.18-40.81) | 0.9 |
| Age (months) | ||||
| <6 | 67 | 20 | 29.85 (17.91-40.08) | 0.9 |
| >6 | 122 | 39 | 31.96 (22.62-39.37) | |
| Season | ||||
| Autumn | 60 | 1 | 1.66 (0.00-3) | |
| Summer | 47 | 19 | 40.4 (25.70-54.29) | <0.0001 |
| Winter | 28 | 0 | 0 | |
| Spring | 54 | 39 | 72.22 (59.77-84.22) | |
| Canine population | ||||
| Canine Pound | 159 | 48 | 30.18 (22.73-37.26) | 0.2 |
| Pet | 10 | 5 | 50 (18.37-81.62) | |
| Hunting | 5 | 0 | 0 | |
| Farm | 15 | 6 | 40 (14.70-65.29) |