| Literature DB >> 33032588 |
J Mack Fudge1, Bailey Boyanowski1, Bernie Page1, Shuling Liu2, Artem S Rogovskyy3.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Most vector-borne pathogens cause zoonotic diseases. These zoonoses often have wild animal reservoirs that play a significant role in disease epidemiology. However, pet animals have also been implicated in transmission of zoonotic agents to humans. To exemplify, dogs are competent reservoir hosts for several zoonotic vector-borne bacteria and protozoa. Despite that vector-borne diseases can be life-threatening for both pets and humans, studies on pathogen seroprevalence are very limited. Therefore, the objective of this study was to determine the serological prevalence of six zoonotic vector-borne agents in dogs from the South Central region of Texas (US). Electronic medical records of dogs, presenting over 2014-2019 for elective ovariohysterectomy or castration at a high volume spay and neuter clinic, were reviewed for serological testing. Sera from 418 dogs were tested for the Dirofilaria immitis antigen, and antibodies to Anaplasma phagocytophilum, Anaplasma platys, Borrelia burgdorferi, Ehrlichia canis, and Ehrlichia ewingi, using a commonly available commercial test kit. Descriptive statistics were computed to characterize the respective seroprevalence rates of the dog population. The study involved 192 (46%) male and 226 (54%) female dogs.Entities:
Keywords: Anaplasmosis; Ehrlichiosis; Heartworm; Lyme borreliosis; Seroprevalence; Tick-borne pathogens
Mesh:
Year: 2020 PMID: 33032588 PMCID: PMC7545558 DOI: 10.1186/s12917-020-02607-w
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Vet Res ISSN: 1746-6148 Impact factor: 2.741
Summary of vector-borne disease serological test results for canine patients admitted to a high volume spay and neuter practice in the South Central region of Texas over 2014–2019
| Categories | Number (%) of positive dogs via SNAP tests by year | Total | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Year | 2014 | 2015 | 2016 | 2017 | 2018 | 2019 | |
| 2 (3.7) | 0 (0) | 0 (0) | 6 (6.5) | 5 (4.9) | 5 (3.8) | 18 (4.3) | |
| 0 (0) | 0 (0) | 1 (4.5) | 0 (0) | 0 (0) | 0 (0) | 1 (0.2) | |
| 7 | 0 (0) | 2 (9.1) | 11 (11.8) | 6 (5.8) | 9 (6.8) | 35 (8.4) | |
| 5 (9.3) | 3 (21.4) | 3 (13.6) | 8 (8.6) | 12 (11.7) | 18 (13.6) | 49 (11.7) | |
| Total test-positive dogsb | 11 (20.4) | 3 (21.4) | 4 (18.2) | 20 (21.5) | 19 (18.4) | 28 (21.2) | 85 (20.3) |
| Total test-negative dogsc | 43 (79.6) | 11 (78.6) | 18 (81.8) | 73 (78.5) | 84 (81.6) | 104 (78.8) | 333 (79.7) |
| Total dogs tested | 54 | 14 | 22 | 93 | 103 | 132 | 418 |
aAn ab, anti-Anaplasma phagocytophilum and/or Anaplasma platys antibodies; Bb ab, anti-Borrelia burgdorferi antibodies; Eh ab, anti-Ehrlichia canis and/or Ehrlichia ewingii antibodies; Di ag, Dirofilaria immitis antigen
bNumber of positive dogs by any of the four SNAP test results
cNumber of negative dogs by all four SNAP test results
Fig. 1The South Central region of Texas (the Greater San Antonio area). The map of the state of Texas (US) depicts all 15 counties from which the studied dogs were originated. The overall area of these counties is 15,557 mile2 (40,292 km2). The counties included: Bandera, Bexar, Blanco, Comal, Edwards, Gillespie, Guadalupe, Hays, Kendall, Kerr, Kimble, Medina, Real, Travis, and Uvalde. SQ MI and SQ KM denote square miles and square kilometers, respectively. The map was generated by using the 2019 Adobe Creative Cloud suite (Illustrator, Photoshop, and InDesign; www.adobe.com)